Abstract

A view has been expressed in the case law of the Supreme Court according to which the provisions of the Civil Code shall apply to determination of the period of limitation for claims to redress damages resulting from violation of author’s economic rights, since such claims are qualified as relating to liability in tort. However, such a position may prolong the period of imitation up to as much as 20 years, as violation of author’s economic rights is frequently an offence from the viewpoint of criminal law. The author declares himself against the possibility of applying the 20-year period of limitation indicating that the claim to redress damages resulting from violation of author’s economic rights by paying a multiple remuneration is substantially different from the classic civil claim for damages by reason of liability in tort, and at the same time is closer to the specific claim to pay remuneration for use of a thing regulated in property law.