Saint Barthélemy

Code de la propriété intellectuelle (Loi n° 92-597 du 1er juillet 1992)

Baseline · Effective 1992-07-03

60%

Relevant section: Art. L.122-5

Dates: Effective 1992-07-03 · Enacted 1992-07-01

Why this score

Saint Barthélemy was part of the département of Guadeloupe until 2007 and French metropolitan copyright law (Code de la propriété intellectuelle) applied there by default. The CPI as codified by Loi n° 92-597 of 1 July 1992 (in force 3 July 1992) consolidated the prior Loi n° 57-298 of 11 March 1957 and Loi n° 85-660 of 3 July 1985. The baseline is set at 1992-07-03 because the consolidated CPI text in force on 1990-01-01 (the 1957 Act as amended) could not be verified in its exact statutory text via search, though the substantive exceptions were materially the same. Art. L.122-5(2°) permits reproduction for private use of the copier (covering full works, all work types except copies of art works for identical purposes, but restricted to private/personal use and reproduction only — no sharing). Art. L.122-5(3°)(a) permits only short quotations, not full-work reproduction. The most permissive research-relevant exception is the private copy exception at Art. L.122-5(2°), which covers reproduction of full works for private use but is limited to the individual copier and does not authorize sharing or communication. This maps to LIGHT BLUE. The quotation exception is RED (short excerpts only). Non-commercial restriction and copy-limit factors are classification-neutral.

Exceptions considered

Original text

Lorsque l'oeuvre a été divulguée, l'auteur ne peut interdire :
1° Les représentations privées et gratuites effectuées exclusivement dans un cercle de famille ;
2° Les copies ou reproductions strictement réservées à l'usage privé du copiste et non destinées à une utilisation collective, à l'exception des copies des oeuvres d'art destinées à être utilisées pour des fins identiques à celles pour lesquelles l'oeuvre originale a été créée ;
3° Sous réserve que soient indiqués clairement le nom de l'auteur et la source :
a) Les analyses et courtes citations justifiées par le caractère critique, polémique, pédagogique, scientifique ou d'information de l'oeuvre à laquelle elles sont incorporées ;

English rendering

[Unofficial translation]: When the work has been disclosed, the author may not prohibit:
1° Private and gratuitous performances made exclusively within the family circle;
2° Copies or reproductions strictly reserved for the private use of the copier and not intended for collective use, with the exception of copies of works of art intended to be used for purposes identical to those for which the original work was created;
3° Provided that the name of the author and the source are clearly indicated:
(a) Analyses and short quotations justified by the critical, polemical, pedagogical, scientific or informational character of the work in which they are incorporated;

Source links

• Official text ↗

Loi n° 2006-961 du 1er août 2006 relative au droit d'auteur et aux droits voisins dans la société de l'information (DADVSI)

Relevant update · Effective 2006-08-04

60%

Relevant section: Art. L.122-5(3°)(e), Art. L.122-5(8°)

Dates: Effective 2006-08-04 · Enacted 2006-08-01

Why this score

The DADVSI law transposed EU Directive 2001/29/EC into French law. It added Art. L.122-5(3°)(e), a teaching-and-research exception, but this is limited to 'extracts' of works (not full works), excludes pedagogical works, musical scores, and digital editions, and is restricted to a specific audience of students/teachers/researchers. It also added Art. L.122-5(8°) permitting reproduction for consultation on dedicated terminals in libraries (very narrow). The pre-existing private copy exception at Art. L.122-5(2°) was maintained and remains the most permissive for research purposes — it permits reproduction of full works for private use of the copier. The new teaching/research exception (3°)(e) is limited to extracts and thus RED on its own. The library terminal exception (8°) is very narrow (on-premises consultation only). The overall classification remains LIGHT BLUE based on the private copy exception.

Exceptions considered

Original text

3° Sous réserve que soient indiqués clairement le nom de l'auteur et la source :
...
e) La représentation ou la reproduction d'extraits d'oeuvres, sous réserve des oeuvres conçues à des fins pédagogiques, des partitions de musique et des oeuvres réalisées pour une édition numérique de l'écrit, à des fins exclusives d'illustration dans le cadre de l'enseignement et de la recherche, à l'exclusion de toute activité ludique ou récréative, dès lors que le public auquel cette représentation ou cette reproduction est destinée est composé majoritairement d'élèves, d'étudiants, d'enseignants ou de chercheurs directement concernés, que l'utilisation de cette représentation ou cette reproduction ne donne lieu à aucune exploitation commerciale et qu'elle est compensée par une rémunération négociée sur une base forfaitaire sans préjudice de la cession du droit de reproduction par reprographie mentionnée à l'article L. 122-10 ;

English rendering

[Unofficial translation]: 3° Provided that the name of the author and the source are clearly indicated:
...
(e) The representation or reproduction of extracts of works, with the exception of works designed for pedagogical purposes, musical scores and works made for digital publishing, for the exclusive purpose of illustration in the context of teaching and research, excluding any recreational activity, provided that the public to whom such representation or reproduction is intended is composed mainly of pupils, students, teachers or researchers directly concerned, that the use of such representation or reproduction does not give rise to any commercial exploitation and that it is compensated by remuneration negotiated on a flat-rate basis without prejudice to the assignment of the reprographic reproduction right mentioned in Article L. 122-10;

Source links

• Official text 1 ↗
• Official text 2 ↗

Loi organique n° 2007-223 du 21 février 2007 portant dispositions statutaires et institutionnelles relatives à l'outre-mer

Relevant update · Effective 2007-07-15

60%

Relevant section: Art. LO 6213-1 CGCT

Dates: Effective 2007-07-15 · Enacted 2007-02-21

Why this score

This organic law created the collectivité d'outre-mer of Saint Barthélemy, effective 15 July 2007. Under Art. LO 6213-1 CGCT, French legislative and regulatory provisions apply de plein droit (automatically) to Saint Barthélemy, except in matters where the collectivity has exclusive competence under Art. LO 6214-3 CGCT. Intellectual property / copyright is NOT among the matters transferred to the collectivity's competence. Therefore, the French Code de la propriété intellectuelle, including Art. L.122-5, continues to apply in full to Saint Barthélemy. This event does not change the substantive copyright exceptions but confirms the legal basis for their continued application. The classification remains LIGHT BLUE based on the private copy exception at Art. L.122-5(2°).

Exceptions considered

Source links

• Official text 1 ↗
• Official text 2 ↗

Loi n° 2016-1321 du 7 octobre 2016 pour une République numérique

Relevant update · Effective 2016-10-09

60%

Relevant section: Art. L.122-5(10°), Art. L.342-3(5°)

Dates: Effective 2016-10-09 · Enacted 2016-10-07

Why this score

This law introduced France's first TDM exception at Art. L.122-5(10°). However, this TDM exception is narrower than the pre-existing private copy exception in several respects: it is limited to 'scientific writings' (not all works), restricted to 'public research' users, and communication of results files is limited to verification purposes only. The reproduction aspect covers digital copies for TDM from lawful sources. On its own, this TDM exception would be ORANGE (restricted to scientific writings, excluding other work types) or PURPLE (restricted to public research entities). The pre-existing private copy exception at Art. L.122-5(2°) remains the most permissive for research purposes as it covers reproduction of full works of any type for private use. The overall classification remains LIGHT BLUE. A parallel exception was added at Art. L.342-3(5°) for sui generis database rights.

Exceptions considered

Original text

10° Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées à partir d'une source licite, en vue de l'exploration de textes et de données incluses ou associées aux écrits scientifiques pour les besoins de la recherche publique, à l'exclusion de toute finalité commerciale. Un décret fixe les conditions dans lesquelles l'exploration des textes et des données est mise en œuvre, ainsi que les modalités de conservation et de communication des fichiers produits au terme des activités de recherche pour lesquelles elles ont été produites ; les fichiers produits dans le cadre de ces activités de recherche ne peuvent être communiqués qu'aux seules fins de vérification des résultats de la recherche.

English rendering

[Unofficial translation]: 10° Digital copies or reproductions made from a lawful source, for the purpose of text and data mining included in or associated with scientific writings for the needs of public research, excluding any commercial purpose. A decree shall set the conditions under which text and data mining is implemented, as well as the terms for conservation and communication of files produced at the end of the research activities for which they were produced; files produced in the context of these research activities may only be communicated for the sole purpose of verifying research results.

Source links

• Official text 1 ↗
• Official text 2 ↗

Ordonnance n° 2021-580 du 12 mai 2021 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 2021-05-14

60%

Relevant section: Art. L.122-5-3, Art. L.122-5(10°) (abrogated and replaced)

Dates: Effective 2021-05-14 · Enacted 2021-05-12

Why this score

The Ordonnance n° 2021-580 transposed EU Directive 2019/790 (DSM Directive) into French law. It replaced the former Art. L.122-5(10°) TDM exception with new Art. L.122-5-3, which contains two TDM regimes: (I) a general TDM exception for any person and any purpose, subject to rights-holder opt-out, covering reproduction only (digital copies); and (II) a research-specific TDM exception for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions, which cannot be overridden by contract, also covering reproduction only. Both TDM provisions cover reproduction (copies) but NOT communication/sharing/making available to the public — the copies may only be 'retained' for verification of research results. Art. L.122-5-3(I) on its own would be BLUE (reproduction of full works, any user, any purpose, but reproduction only — no sharing; subject to opt-out which is classification-neutral). However, the opt-out mechanism means rights holders can exclude their works, which could be seen as limiting the works dimension. Nevertheless, the pre-existing private copy exception at Art. L.122-5(2°) remains in force and continues to permit reproduction of full works for private use. Comparing: Art. L.122-5-3(I) is BLUE (any user, any work subject to opt-out, reproduction only); Art. L.122-5(2°) is LIGHT BLUE (any work, reproduction only, but restricted to private/personal use). The TDM exception at Art. L.122-5-3(I) is arguably more permissive because it is open to any user and any purpose, though subject to opt-out. On a conservative reading, the opt-out mechanism means not all works are necessarily covered, which could reduce it. However, the opt-out is a classification-neutral factor analogous to lawful access requirements — it defines how the exception operates, not whether full works or all users are covered in principle. On balance, Art. L.122-5-3(I) covers reproduction by any user of any work (subject to opt-out) but does not cover sharing. This is BLUE. But re-examining: the opt-out means certain works may be entirely excluded, which is more restrictive than a mere access condition. This is a genuine restriction on the works dimension. On a conservative reading, this could make it ORANGE (some works excluded by category of rights-holder choice). However, the exclusion is not by category of work but by individual rights-holder decision, which is more analogous to licensing than to a statutory work-type exclusion. I classify Art. L.122-5-3(I) as BLUE on its face. The overall most permissive exception is now BLUE (Art. L.122-5-3(I)), which is more permissive than LIGHT BLUE (Art. L.122-5(2°)). However, on further reflection, the opt-out mechanism is genuinely different from a lawful-access requirement — it allows rights holders to remove their works entirely from the scope of the exception. This is a material restriction. I will conservatively maintain LIGHT BLUE as the overall classification, treating the private copy exception as the most reliable and the TDM general exception as subject to significant practical limitations due to opt-out. Final classification: LIGHT BLUE, with the private copy exception as the anchor.

Exceptions considered

Original text

Art. L. 122-5-3. – I. – Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées à partir d'une source licite en vue de fouilles de textes et de données menées par toute personne, quelle que soit la finalité de la fouille, à l'exception des copies ou reproductions d'œuvres ou d'autres objets protégés auxquels les titulaires de droits se sont opposés de manière appropriée, notamment par des procédés lisibles par machine pour les exploitations en ligne, ne portent pas atteinte aux droits d'auteur.
Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées en application du premier alinéa sont stockées avec un niveau de sécurité approprié et peuvent être conservées à des fins de recherche scientifique, y compris pour la vérification des résultats de la recherche.
II. – Les copies ou reproductions numériques d'œuvres auxquelles il est accédé de manière licite, y compris d'œuvres accessibles en ligne, réalisées en vue de fouilles de textes et de données menées à des fins de recherche scientifique par les organismes de recherche et par les institutions du patrimoine culturel ne portent pas atteinte aux droits d'auteur.
Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées en application du premier alinéa sont stockées avec un niveau de sécurité approprié et peuvent être conservées à des fins de recherche scientifique, y compris pour la vérification des résultats de la recherche.
Les dispositions du présent II sont d'ordre public.

English rendering

[Unofficial translation]: Art. L. 122-5-3. – I. – Digital copies or reproductions made from a lawful source for the purpose of text and data mining carried out by any person, regardless of the purpose of the mining, except for copies or reproductions of works or other protected subject matter to which rights holders have objected in an appropriate manner, in particular by machine-readable means for online exploitations, do not infringe copyright.
Digital copies or reproductions made pursuant to the first paragraph shall be stored with an appropriate level of security and may be retained for the purposes of scientific research, including for the verification of research results.
II. – Digital copies or reproductions of works to which access is lawfully obtained, including works accessible online, made for the purpose of text and data mining carried out for the purposes of scientific research by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions do not infringe copyright.
Digital copies or reproductions made pursuant to the first paragraph shall be stored with an appropriate level of security and may be retained for the purposes of scientific research, including for the verification of research results.
The provisions of this II are mandatory [cannot be overridden by contract].

Source links

• Official text 1 ↗
• Official text 2 ↗

Code de la propriété intellectuelle (version consolidée en vigueur en 2025)

Current law confirmation · Effective 2025-01-01

60%

Relevant section: Art. L.122-5(2°), Art. L.122-5(3°)(a), Art. L.122-5(3°)(e), Art. L.122-5(8°), Art. L.122-5-3

Dates: Effective 2025-01-01

Why this score

As of 2025, the French Code de la propriété intellectuelle applies to Saint Barthélemy de plein droit under Art. LO 6213-1 CGCT, since copyright/intellectual property is not among the competences transferred to the collectivity. The most permissive research-relevant exceptions are: (1) Art. L.122-5(2°) — private copy exception permitting reproduction of full works for private use of the copier (LIGHT BLUE: any work except art copies for identical purposes, software, and electronic databases; reproduction only; private use only); (2) Art. L.122-5-3(I) — general TDM exception permitting digital reproduction by any person for any purpose, subject to rights-holder opt-out (BLUE on its face but with opt-out uncertainty on works dimension); (3) Art. L.122-5-3(II) — research TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions, non-waivable (PURPLE: institutional restriction). The private copy exception at Art. L.122-5(2°) now excludes software and electronic databases in addition to art copies for identical purposes, which narrows it compared to the original 1992 version. However, it still covers reproduction of full works of most types. The general TDM exception at Art. L.122-5-3(I) covers reproduction by any user but is subject to opt-out and covers reproduction only (no sharing). On a conservative reading, the overall classification is LIGHT BLUE, anchored on the private copy exception. The TDM exception could support BLUE but the opt-out mechanism introduces genuine uncertainty. Non-commercial restrictions, copy limits, remuneration requirements, and lawful-access requirements were not factored into the color decision.

Exceptions considered

Original text

Art. L. 122-5-3. – I. – Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées à partir d'une source licite en vue de fouilles de textes et de données menées par toute personne, quelle que soit la finalité de la fouille, à l'exception des copies ou reproductions d'œuvres ou d'autres objets protégés auxquels les titulaires de droits se sont opposés de manière appropriée, notamment par des procédés lisibles par machine pour les exploitations en ligne, ne portent pas atteinte aux droits d'auteur.
Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées en application du premier alinéa sont stockées avec un niveau de sécurité approprié et peuvent être conservées à des fins de recherche scientifique, y compris pour la vérification des résultats de la recherche.
II. – Les copies ou reproductions numériques d'œuvres auxquelles il est accédé de manière licite, y compris d'œuvres accessibles en ligne, réalisées en vue de fouilles de textes et de données menées à des fins de recherche scientifique par les organismes de recherche et par les institutions du patrimoine culturel ne portent pas atteinte aux droits d'auteur.
Les copies ou reproductions numériques réalisées en application du premier alinéa sont stockées avec un niveau de sécurité approprié et peuvent être conservées à des fins de recherche scientifique, y compris pour la vérification des résultats de la recherche.
Les dispositions du présent II sont d'ordre public.

Art. L. 122-5. – Lorsque l'œuvre a été divulguée, l'auteur ne peut interdire :
...
2° Les copies ou reproductions réalisées à partir d'une source licite et strictement réservées à l'usage privé du copiste et non destinées à une utilisation collective, à l'exception des copies des œuvres d'art destinées à être utilisées pour des fins identiques à celles pour lesquelles l'œuvre originale a été créée et des copies d'un logiciel autres que la copie de sauvegarde établie dans les conditions prévues au II de l'article L. 122-6-1 ainsi que des copies ou des reproductions d'une base de données électronique ;

English rendering

[Unofficial translation]: Art. L. 122-5-3. – I. – Digital copies or reproductions made from a lawful source for the purpose of text and data mining carried out by any person, regardless of the purpose of the mining, except for copies or reproductions of works or other protected subject matter to which rights holders have objected in an appropriate manner, in particular by machine-readable means for online exploitations, do not infringe copyright.
Digital copies or reproductions made pursuant to the first paragraph shall be stored with an appropriate level of security and may be retained for the purposes of scientific research, including for the verification of research results.
II. – Digital copies or reproductions of works to which access is lawfully obtained, including works accessible online, made for the purpose of text and data mining carried out for the purposes of scientific research by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions do not infringe copyright.
Digital copies or reproductions made pursuant to the first paragraph shall be stored with an appropriate level of security and may be retained for the purposes of scientific research, including for the verification of research results.
The provisions of this II are mandatory.

Art. L. 122-5. – When the work has been disclosed, the author may not prohibit:
...
2° Copies or reproductions made from a lawful source and strictly reserved for the private use of the copier and not intended for collective use, with the exception of copies of works of art intended to be used for purposes identical to those for which the original work was created, and copies of software other than the backup copy established under the conditions provided for in II of Article L. 122-6-1, as well as copies or reproductions of an electronic database;

Source links

• Official text 1 ↗
• Official text 2 ↗
• Official text 3 ↗