On Creativity and Originality in Copyright through the Prism of Forensic Expertise

Author information:

Serhii Petrenko
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Senior Research Fellow, Associate Professor, Department of Intellectual Property and Information Law, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2053-1285

Published: 23.03.2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2026-8-1-113-122

Keywords: creative solutions, originality, copyright law, forensic examination, use of copyrighted works

Download PDF
Обкладинка. 8-й випуск

Abstract

The new copyright law adopted in January 2023 introduced many novelties, sometimes unexpected, in particular with regard to creativity and originality in copyright. At present, both in European and domestic legal traditions, a result of an author’s creative activity is eligible for protection provided that it reflects the author’s individuality. This indicates a shift in emphasis, when determining whether a work possesses the characteristics of a copyrightable subject matter, from the criterion of creativity to that of individuality. This, in turn, creates grounds for the parties in copyright disputes to quantify and identify specific creative solutions, as well as to prove or refute their actual existence, for example, through forensic examinations. The aim of this article is to analyse the approaches applied in forensic expert practice to determine whether a work meets the requirement of originality in the context of recognising it as a copyrightable work, as well as to establish the use of protected elements of a work in the creation of other works. The concepts of creativity and originality in copyright law are examined through the lens of forensic expert examination. Scientific, methodological, and methodological approaches used in forensic examinations in the field of copyright are explained with regard to determining whether a work possesses the characteristic (criterion) of originality. It is recommended that the methodologies for conducting forensic examinations in the field of copyright be further improved on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of law-enforcement and forensic expert practice in the context of the contemporary doctrine of copyright protection. It is also proposed to review the list of questions submitted for resolution in forensic examinations in the field of copyright and to determine the relationship between the content of such questions and the issues that must necessarily be examined in addressing particular expert tasks, depending on the subject matter of the dispute. The results and recommendations presented in this study are aimed at improving the professional activity of forensic experts.

How to Cite

In accordance with DSTU 8302:2015:
Петренко С. Про творчість та оригінальність в авторському праві через призму судової експертизи. Цивілістична платформа. 2026. № 1 (8). С. 113-122. https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2026-8-1-123-141

According to the international style of APA:
Petrenko, S. (2026) On Creativity and Originality in Copyright through the Prism of Forensic Expertise. С. P. Journal, 1 (8). https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2026-8-1-113-122 [in Ukrainian].

References

  1. Kohler, Josef. (1880) The Author’s Right. A civil law treatise, at the same time a contribution to the doctrine of ownership, co-ownership, legal transactions and individual rights. In: Yearbook for the Dogmatics of Contemporary Roman and German Private Law. Vol. 18 (N.F. 6) [in German]

  2. Ulmer, Eugen. (1960) Copyright and Publishing Law. Berlin; Heidelberg; New York: Springer-Verlag, XXII [in German]

  3. Jonas, V. Ya. (1968) The Right to Works of Science, Literature and Art. Kyiv: Kyiv University Publishing House [in Ukrainian]

  4. Gordon, M. V. (1955) Soviet Copyright. Moscow: Gosyurizdat [in Russian]

  5. Zhukov, V.I. (2018) Initial premises for the development of the protectability of electronic software, in: Essays on intellectual property law: collection of articles / [I.V. Spasibo-Fateeva, S.A. Glotov et al.; ed. I.V. Spasibo-Fateeva]. – Kharkov: Pravo [in Russian]

  6. Copyright and related rights law. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/urhg/ (accessed: 20.02.2026) [in German]

  7. On copyright and related rights (2022, December 01) Law of Ukraine 2811-IX.https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2811-20#Text (accessed: 20.02.2026) [in Ukrainian]

  8. Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) (December 1, 2011) (Ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien – Austria). https://infocuria.curia.europa.eu/tabs/affair?sort=AFF_NUM-DESC&searchTerm=%22c-145%2F10%22&publishedId=c-145%2F10 (accessed: 20.02.2026)

  9. Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) (July 16, 2009) (Ruling from the Højesteret – Denmark) – Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening. https://infocuria.curia.europa.eu/tabs/affair?sort=AFF_NUM-DESC&searchTerm=%22C-5%2F08%22&publishedId=C-5%2F08 (accessed: 20.02.2026)

  10. Liptsik, D. (2002) Copyright and Related Rights / Delia Liptsik; Translated from French. Moscow: Ladomir; UNESCO Publishing House [in Russian]

  11. Dietz, Adolf (2018) Copyright Protection of Creative Individuals (Authors and Performers), or Five Pillars of Modern Continental European Copyright Law: Essays on Intellectual Property Law: Coll. Art. / [I. V. Spasibo-Fateeva, S. A. Glotov et al.; ed. I. V. Spasibo-Fateeva]. – Kharkov: Pravo [in Russian]

  12. CJEU C- 469/17 Funke Medien v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Afghanistan Papiere] ECLI:EU:C:2019:623

  13. On the application of legislative norms by courts in cases on the protection of copyright and related rights (2010, June 4) Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, 5. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v0005700-10#Text (accessed: 20.02.2026) [in Ukrainian]

  14. Kohler, Johann (1907) Copyright in Writings and Publishing Law, Stuttgart [in German]

  15. Н.O. de Boor (1917) Copyright and Publishing Law, Stuttgart [in German]

  16. Gavrilov, E. P. (1984) Soviet Copyright. Basic Provisions. Development Trends / E. P. Gavrilov. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian]

  17. Svyatotsky, O.D., Drobyazko, V.S. (Ed.) (2000) Intellectual property: dictionary-reference book. In 2 volumes: 1. Copyright and related rights. K.: Publishing House “In Yure” [in Ukrainian]

  18. Bentley, L., Sherman, B. (2004) Intellectual Property Law: Copyright / Translated from English by V.L. Wolfson. St. Petersburg: Publishing House “Legal Center Press” [in Russian]

  19. Lawrence, Kenrick v. (1890) 25 QBD 99, 102

  20. Kharkiv Court of Appeal (April 10, 2025) Resolution in case No. 643/8610/23https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/126567123 (accessed: 20.02.2026) [in Ukrainian]

     

© Civil Platform. All rights reserved. 2026