483

News

Supreme Court upholds newspaper fine for using Little Mermaid image

Armelle Delmelle
February 11th, 2022


This article is more than 2 years old.

Berlingske the latest to fall foul of Edvard Eriksen’s heirs

Edvrad Eriksen

Edvard Eriksen unveiled the Little Mermaid statue in 1913 after Carl Jocobson asked him to make it in 1909.

Everybody in Copenhagen knows her; the Little Mermaid is a national treasure in the eyes of many people. It’s the ultimate symbol of the Danish capital.

There is just one small detail that most people don’t know: you have to pay royalties to use a photograph of it to illustrate its national treasure status.

And Berlingske’s editor-in-chief has just learned that the hard way.

Expensive images
The Østre Landsret high court had already ruled that the newspaper should pay compensation of 300,000 kroner for twice using the statue’s image. One of them was in a cartoon!

A district court had previously set the payment at 285,000, and now the Supreme Court has upheld the 300,000 fine.

It’s good news for the heirs of Edvard Eriksen, who created the sculpture between 1909 and 1913.

Not a first
This case is just one of many, in fact. The Eriksen clan are experts at asking for royalties.

The work of Eriksen, who passed away in 1959, is protected for 70 years after his death.

His heirs will lose their rights to royalties in 2029, at which point the image of the Little Mermaid will be in the public domain. Until then they are free to ask for royalties from anyone who uses the statue’s image when it is not integral to the story.

Laws that apply (almost) everywhere
The laws that protect works of art are written into international treaties and conventions.

This means that if you commercially use a picture of a monument outside of Denmark, you could end up being asked for royalties too.

A good example of it is the Eiffel Tower in Paris. If you photograph it by day, there is no problem. By night, however, the copyright for the light work only dates back to 1985.


Share

Most popular

Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign up to receive The Daily Post

















Latest Podcast

A survey carried out by Megafon for TV2 has found that 71 percent of parents have handed over children to daycare in spite of them being sick.

Moreover, 21 percent of those surveyed admitted to medicating their kids with paracetamol, such as Panodil, before sending them to school.

The FOLA parents’ organisation is shocked by the findings.

“I think it is absolutely crazy. It simply cannot be that a child goes to school sick and plays with lots of other children. Then we are faced with the fact that they will infect the whole institution,” said FOLA chair Signe Nielsen.

Pill pushers
At the Børnehuset daycare institution in Silkeborg a meeting was called where parents were implored not to bring their sick children to school.

At Børnehuset there are fears that parents prefer to pack their kids off with a pill without informing teachers.

“We occasionally have children who that they have had a pill for breakfast,” said headteacher Susanne Bødker. “You might think that it is a Panodil more than a vitamin pill, if it is a child who has just been sick, for example.”

Parents sick and tired
Parents, when confronted, often cite pressure at work as a reason for not being able to stay at home with their children.

Many declare that they simply cannot take another day off, as they are afraid of being fired.

Allan Randrup Thomsen, a professor of virology at KU, has heavily criticised the parents’ actions, describing the current situation as a “vicious circle”.

“It promotes the spread of viruses, and it adds momentum to a cycle where parents are pressured by high levels of sick-leave. If they then choose to send the children to daycare while they are still recovering, they keep the epidemic going in daycares, and this in turn puts a greater burden on the parents.”