Abstract

The authors present a commentary to the Supreme Court resolution finding that the use of an image of a publicly known person as an element of a magazine cover containing an advertisement of the magazine in accordance with Article 81.2.1 of the copyright law should not be assessed in the light of Art. 81.1 of that law as infringing the right to an image.

As a matter of principle, the authors share the arguments of the Supreme Court presented in the resolution, stressing, however, that it would be groundless to maintain that every usage of this kind is legal, especially when it involves an advertisement of another form of publication of that magazine tied with an advertisement of some other products.

Apart from that, they indicate that in the case at hand the claimant is a well-known public TV journalist who is bound by the ban to appear in advertisements, which should also be taken into consideration by the court in the context of any possible granting of legal protection to her.