Paris Bar –
Commissioned painter as
Co-author?
Paris Bar –
Commissioned painter as
Co-author?
from
Munich Higher Regional Court decides on the question of the co-authorship of the commissioned painter of the paintings “Paris Bar” by Kippenberger.
Authorship and co-authorship
An author is someone who forms a work as their own personal intellectual creation and uses creative freedom in doing so. What is required is an original that reflects the personality of the creator by expressing their free creative decisions. Co-authorship is deemed to exist if several persons make creative contributions in conscious cooperation aimed at a uniform work that cannot be meaningfully exploited in isolation. Even a relatively small contribution can lead to co-authorship, provided that it has its own creative traits and is not merely a technical implementation of technical specifications.
Info box
moral rights
Moral rights are an essential component of copyright law and protect the author’s personal and moral interests in their work. It includes various laws that ensure that the author retains control over the use and distribution of their creative creations.
Special feature of German copyright law:
The moral right is non-transferable and continues to exist after the death of the author, although it can generally be asserted by the heirs or successors for a certain period of time.
Central aspects of moral rights:
- Right to acknowledge authorship: The author has the right to be named as the creator of his work. This means that his name must be mentioned in connection with the work when it is published or used.
- Law on protection against distortion: The author can defend himself against changes or adaptations of his work that could damage his honor or reputation. This protects the integrity of the work and the author’s personal connection to his creation.
- Right of publication: The author has the law to decide whether and when their work is published. This gives them control over the time and type of publication.
- Right of withdrawal : In certain cases, the author may withdraw his work, in particular if it is used in a manner contrary to his personal interests.
between conceptual art and commissioned painting
Two famous paintings were in dispute: “Paris Bar Version 1” (1992) and “Paris Bar Version 2” (1993). Both works were created on the basis of photographs that the artist Martin Kippenberger had commissioned from a poster painting company. A freelance commissioned artist transferred the photographic templates onto large-format canvases in the style of photorealism and signed the works. Kippenberger’s estate later marketed them as Kippenberger’s sole works and listed them under his name in the catalog raisonné. The commissioned artist sued the Munich Regional Court for recognition of his co-authorship and demanded an injunction against the exploitation of the “Paris Bar” paintings without naming his co-authorship. He relied in particular on his independent decisions on coloring, light, contrasts and atmospheric effect. With success.
Commissioned artist is co-author
On appeal by the administrator of Kippenberger’s estate, the Munich Higher Regional Court confirmed the decision of the court of first instance in its ruling of December 18, 2025 – 29 U 3581/23 e. The commissioned painter is co-author of both works because they embody his personal intellectual creation. The administrator of Kippenberger’s estate would have to name the commissioned painter as co-author when exploiting the “Paris Bar” paintings.
A personal intellectual creation is a creation of individual character whose aesthetic content has reached such a degree that it can be considered an artistic achievement.
The court found that the commissioned painter had sufficient creative leeway in the implementation of the photographic templates, which he used independently, in particular through decisions on coloring, light, contrast, level of detail and atmosphere. Martin Kippenberger’s specifications and the photographic template therefore did not completely determine the work, but left room for free creative decisions by the commissioned artist. These creative contributions help to shape the overall impression of the “Paris Bar” paintings, so that they cannot be meaningfully separated from the work as a whole and thus lead to co-authorship.
Conclusion
The decision strengthens the position of commissioned artists and shows that commissioned painters should not be reduced to the role of mere “craftsmen” in the context of conceptual art projects. The decisive factor remains whether – as in the case of the “Paris Bar” – they use actual creative leeway, for example in terms of color mood, lighting or level of detail, and thus bring their individual signature to the work. Anyone exploiting complex pictorial works must carefully examine possible co-authorship and ensure correct copyright designations in order to avoid injunctive relief and subsequent claims.
We are happy to
advise you about
Copyright!
