What Would Da Vinci Say?
A legal battle over the commercial use of one of Da Vinci's most famous drawing heats up in the European Union
Whether or not you know the name of this particular famous drawing of Leonardo Da Vinci, you most assuredly have seen it at least once in your lifetime: The Vitruvian Man. This historic drawing is at the center of a legal battle involving claims brought in two different courts in Italy and Germany.
The Italian government and a museum in Venice claim that they are owed licensing fees from Ravensburger, a German puzzle making company who used an image of The Vitruvian Man in one of its puzzles. One interesting fact here is that relative to the age of Da Vinci’s work, Ravensburger seems like a relative youngster, having been founded as recently as 1883. (!)
An impossibly brief history of The Vitruvian Man
The Vitruvian Man is a study in geometry, mathematics and human anatomy created circa 1490 by Da Vinci after he studied the works of the Roman architect Vitruvius, who theorized that:
a human figure could fit perfectly inside a circle and a square. He stated that if a man lay flat on his back with arms and legs extended, his fingers and toes would touch the circumference of a circle, with his navel at the centre. Vitruvius also observed that, because the height of the human body is the same measurement as the length of its outstretched arms, the human figure is comparable to a perfect square, whose sides are of equal measurement. However, Vitruvius’s treatise did not include illustrations. Read more here.
Da Vinci conducted his own research, and reached some conclusions which differed slightly from Vitruvius’s conclusions. Da Vinci’s research culminated in the drawing we all know:
The Legal Dispute
So then, what is the source of the legal dispute? In the European Union, the 2019 Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) Directive governs - or attempts to govern - EU member countries on this issue. Article 14 of the Directive provides:
Works of visual art in the public domain
Member States shall provide that, when the term of protection of a work of visual art has expired, any material resulting from an act of reproduction of that work is not subject to copyright or related rights, unless the material resulting from that act of reproduction is original in the sense that it is the author's own intellectual creation.
While the language of the Directive is seemingly clear, the application of the Directive in different EU countries is not consistent. In Italy, the Cultural Heritage Code purports to require that businesses pay a fee for faithful digital reproductions of cultural properties being used for commercial purposes after receiving authorization from the cultural heritage institution that kept the physical work.
In 2019, the Italian government and the Gallerie dell’Accademia in Venice demanded that Ravensburger stop sales of a puzzle that, when completed, displays a reproduction of The Vitruvian Man, or pay a fee. Unsurprisingly, Ravensburger declined both requests. Subsequently in 2022, the Gallerie obtained an order from a The Court of Venice, Second Chamber directing Ravensburger to pay a penalty of €1,500 per day for each day it delays payment.
In March 2024, in a separate dispute between the parties over the same issue, a German court reached the opposite conclusion, ruling that the Italian Cultural Heritage Code law has no extraterritorial application over a German company. Two national courts, opposite results.
Undoubtedly, the Italian parties will pursue appellate remedies.
Key Takeaways
Copyright law is not just riddled with uncertainty in the United States, that is also the case in the European Union.
Even when there is apparent certainty around a particular subject, a legal dispute arises that causes one to question that certainty.
Legal interpretations in national courts in different EU nations on the same matter can and will reach opposite conclusions, not unlike the how state courts in the United States reach different results on similar legal issues due to state specific laws and regulations.
Copyright law is rarely boring. Whenever you get to use the words Vitruvian AND Ravensburger in the same sentence, you know it is a good day indeed.
J. Bryan Tuk, Esq. is the principal of Tuk Business & Entertainment Law. In addition to twenty five years of private practice as an attorney, Bryan is also a professional musician and producer, and a member of The Recording Academy and the American Society of Composers and Producers.