Back to atlas

country page

Luxembourg

Loi modifiée du 18 avril 2001 sur les droits d'auteur, les droits voisins et les bases de données (as amended through Loi du 1er avril 2022).

Copyright exception history

0%20%40%60%80%100%199019952000200520102015202020251990: 0%1991: 0%1992: 0%1993: 0%1994: 0%1995: 0%1996: 0%1997: 0%1998: 0%1999: 0%2000: 0%2001: 60%2002: 60%2003: 60%2004: 100%2005: 100%2006: 100%2007: 100%2008: 100%2009: 100%2010: 100%2011: 100%2012: 100%2013: 100%2014: 100%2015: 100%2016: 100%2017: 100%2018: 100%2019: 100%2020: 100%2021: 100%2022: 100%2023: 100%2024: 100%2025: 100%YearOpenness score (%)

Selected year snapshot

For 1999, the active event in this file is Loi du 29 mars 1972 sur le droit d'auteur.

0%

Current rationale

The 1972 Luxembourg Copyright Act (Loi du 29 mars 1972) was the copyright statute in force on 1990-01-01. It contained limited exceptions, primarily a quotation exception (Art. 10) permitting short excerpts for criticism, review, and educational purposes, and no general private-use reproduction exception permitting full-work copying for research. There was no fair use, fair dealing, or general research exception. The quotation exception was limited to short passages/excerpts and did not permit reproduction of full works. No institutional copying exception for research existed. The law was silent on sharing for research. Under the color hierarchy, the most permissive research-relevant exception was the quotation right, which is capped at excerpts, yielding RED. I was unable to retrieve the full verbatim text of the 1972 Act via web search to confirm exact wording, but the structure of the law is well-documented as having only narrow exceptions.

Exceptions considered

Art. 100%QuotationMost permissive

Quotation exception permitting short excerpts for criticism, review, teaching purposes with attribution

Law changes

Loi du 29 mars 1972 sur le droit d'auteur

Baseline · Effective 1972-03-29

0%

Relevant section: Art. 10

Dates: Effective 1972-03-29 · Enacted 1972-03-29

Why this score

The 1972 Luxembourg Copyright Act (Loi du 29 mars 1972) was the copyright statute in force on 1990-01-01. It contained limited exceptions, primarily a quotation exception (Art. 10) permitting short excerpts for criticism, review, and educational purposes, and no general private-use reproduction exception permitting full-work copying for research. There was no fair use, fair dealing, or general research exception. The quotation exception was limited to short passages/excerpts and did not permit reproduction of full works. No institutional copying exception for research existed. The law was silent on sharing for research. Under the color hierarchy, the most permissive research-relevant exception was the quotation right, which is capped at excerpts, yielding RED. I was unable to retrieve the full verbatim text of the 1972 Act via web search to confirm exact wording, but the structure of the law is well-documented as having only narrow exceptions.

Exceptions considered

Art. 100%QuotationMost permissive

Quotation exception permitting short excerpts for criticism, review, teaching purposes with attribution

Loi du 18 avril 2001 sur les droits d'auteur, les droits voisins et les bases de données

Relevant update · Effective 2001-04-18

60%

Relevant section: Art. 10(1), Art. 10(2)

Dates: Effective 2001-04-18 · Enacted 2001-04-18

Why this score

The 2001 Act introduced a comprehensive set of exceptions. Art. 10(1)(1) permits 'fragmentary reproductions' for strictly private purposes — this is limited to excerpts, not full works, so it is RED standing alone. Art. 10(2) permits reproductions on any medium other than paper, reserved for the private use of the person making them. This provision does not contain the 'fragmentary' limitation and thus could cover full-work reproduction on digital media for private use. However, it is restricted to 'private use of the person making them' (individual/personal use only), does not cover sharing/communication, and applies to all types of works (though databases and computer programs have separate regimes). Art. 10(1)(3) is a quotation/short citation exception limited to excerpts (RED). The most permissive exception for research is Art. 10(2), which permits full-work reproduction on non-paper media for private use by the individual — this maps to LIGHT BLUE (reproduction of full works, any works, but restricted to individual private use, no sharing). Non-commercial restriction and lawful-access requirements are classification-neutral.

Exceptions considered

Art. 10(1)(1)0%Private Use

Fragmentary reproductions for strictly private purpose, not prejudicing normal exploitation

Art. 10(1)(3)0%Quotation

Analyses and short quotations justified by critical, polemical, pedagogical, scientific or informational character

Art. 10(2)60%Private UseMost permissive

Reproductions on any medium other than paper, reserved for private use of the person making them, not prejudicing normal exploitation

Art. 10(1)(5)100%Educational

Reproduction and communication for teaching or scientific research purposes to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose pursued, with attribution

Original text

English rendering

Source links

Loi du 18 avril 2004 modifiant la loi modifiée du 18 avril 2001 sur les droits d'auteur, les droits voisins et les bases de données

Relevant update · Effective 2004-04-18

100%

Relevant section: Art. 10(1), Art. 10(2)

Dates: Effective 2004-04-18 · Enacted 2004-04-18

Why this score

The 2004 amendment transposed Directive 2001/29/EC into Luxembourg law and revised Art. 10. Art. 10(1)(5) now explicitly permits both 'reproduction and communication to the public' for the purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research. This covers both reproduction AND sharing/communication, applies to all types of works (no category exclusion), and is not restricted to specific institutions — any person engaged in scientific research can invoke it. The non-commercial purpose requirement is classification-neutral. The requirement to indicate the source is standard and classification-neutral. Art. 10(2) also broadened private copying to 'any medium' (removing the earlier exclusion of paper). The most permissive exception is Art. 10(1)(5): it covers reproduction + communication, all works, any user for scientific research purposes → GREEN.

Exceptions considered

Art. 10(1)(1)0%Private Use

Fragmentary reproductions for strictly private purpose

Art. 10(1)(3)0%Quotation

Analyses and short quotations justified by critical, polemical, pedagogical, scientific or informational character

Art. 10(1)(5)100%ResearchMost permissive

Reproduction and communication to the public for illustration for teaching or scientific research, non-commercial, with attribution

Art. 10(2)60%Private Use

Reproductions on any medium, reserved for private use of the person making them, not prejudicing normal exploitation

Original text

English rendering

Source links

Loi du 1er avril 2022 portant transposition de la directive (UE) 2019/790 sur le droit d'auteur et les droits voisins dans le marché unique numérique

Relevant update · Effective 2022-04-01

100%

Relevant section: Art. 5bis, Art. 5ter (new articles inserted into the 2001 Act)

Dates: Effective 2022-04-01 · Enacted 2022-04-01

Why this score

The 2022 Act transposed Directive (EU) 2019/790 (DSM Directive) into Luxembourg law. It added new TDM exceptions: Art. 5bis (TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions, no opt-out) and Art. 5ter (general TDM for any user, subject to rights-holder opt-out). These cover reproduction and extraction for TDM purposes. However, the pre-existing Art. 10(1)(5) — permitting reproduction AND communication to the public for scientific research — remains in force and is still the most permissive general research exception (GREEN). The new TDM provisions add specific authorization for computational analysis but are limited to reproduction/extraction (not communication), so standing alone Art. 5bis would be PURPLE (institutional restriction) and Art. 5ter would be BLUE (reproduction only, any user, subject to opt-out). The overall classification remains GREEN because Art. 10(1)(5) continues to provide the broadest research exception covering both reproduction and communication for scientific research by any user.

Exceptions considered

Art. 10(1)(1)0%Private Use

Fragmentary reproductions for strictly private purpose

Art. 10(1)(3)0%Quotation

Analyses and short quotations justified by critical, polemical, pedagogical, scientific or informational character

Art. 10(1)(5)100%ResearchMost permissive

Reproduction and communication to the public for illustration for teaching or scientific research, non-commercial, with attribution

Art. 10(2)60%Private Use

Reproductions on any medium, reserved for private use of the person making them

Art. 5bis40%Tdm

TDM by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for scientific research, no opt-out

Art. 5ter80%Tdm

General TDM exception for any user, reproduction and extraction, subject to rights-holder opt-out

Original text

English rendering

Source links

Loi modifiée du 18 avril 2001 sur les droits d'auteur, les droits voisins et les bases de données (as amended through Loi du 1er avril 2022)

Current law confirmation · Effective 2022-04-01

100%

Relevant section: Art. 10(1)(5), Art. 10(2), Art. 5bis, Art. 5ter

Dates: Effective 2022-04-01 · Enacted 2022-04-01

Why this score

As of 2025, the amended law of 18 April 2001 remains in force with all amendments through the 2022 transposition of the DSM Directive. The most permissive research-relevant exception is Art. 10(1)(5), which permits both reproduction AND communication to the public for the purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research. This exception: (1) Uses: covers reproduction and communication to the public (both exclusive rights); (2) Works: applies to all types of works without category exclusion; (3) Users: is not restricted to specific institutions — any person engaged in scientific research may invoke it. The non-commercial purpose requirement is classification-neutral per the instructions. The source-indication requirement is standard and classification-neutral. Additionally, Art. 5bis provides a dedicated TDM exception for research organisations (PURPLE standing alone) and Art. 5ter provides a general TDM exception for any user (BLUE standing alone, as it covers only reproduction/extraction, not communication). The private-use exception in Art. 10(2) remains available (LIGHT BLUE). The overall classification is GREEN based on Art. 10(1)(5) as the most permissive exception.

Exceptions considered

Art. 10(1)(1)0%Private Use

Fragmentary reproductions for strictly private purpose, not prejudicing normal exploitation

Art. 10(1)(3)0%Quotation

Analyses and short quotations justified by critical, polemical, pedagogical, scientific or informational character

Art. 10(1)(5)100%ResearchMost permissive

Reproduction and communication to the public for illustration for teaching or scientific research, non-commercial, with attribution

Art. 10(2)60%Private Use

Reproductions on any medium, reserved for private use of the person making them, not prejudicing normal exploitation

Art. 5bis40%Tdm

TDM by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for scientific research purposes, lawful access required, no opt-out

Art. 5ter80%Tdm

General TDM exception for any user, reproduction and extraction of lawfully accessible works, subject to rights-holder opt-out

Original text

English rendering

Source links