Logo as a work of art: Perspectives from judicial practice in Kosovo

A logo may include visual elements combining text with figurative components or consist solely of figurative elements, designed to represent a specific entity or project. Under Article 5 of Kosovo’s Law on Copyright and Related Rights, logos qualify for protection as works of art.

Like any other work, a logo must be original, reflecting the individual creativity of its author, to qualify for copyright protection. No additional criteria are required. Due to this originality requirement, it is not uncommon for a company’s logo to fail to qualify as a copyrighted work. This raises a natural question: How original must a logo be to gain copyright protection? Judicial practice in each country offers answers to this question, and the matter has also been recently addressed by the competent court in Kosovo, specifically the Commercial Court.

In case no. KE 227/22, the Commercial Court of Kosovo stated: “Logos containing basic geometric shapes, standard letters, or common symbols, without significant creative elements, do not exhibit a sufficient level of creative expression…” (Case No. KE 227/22, dated 27.03.2024, page 8). The court further elaborated: “To meet the criterion of a copyrighted work, the logo must exhibit a level of originality, creativity, and artistic expression that distinguishes it from ordinary design, incorporating unique visual elements, a distinct presentation style, specific visual concepts, and artistic techniques in form, text, and color, reflecting the designer’s (author’s) creativity and individuality” (Case No. KE 227/22, dated 27.03.2024, page 9). Therefore, to answer the question raised in the preceding paragraph, judicial practice in Kosovo highlighted that for a logo to qualify for copyright protection, it must go beyond basic or common design elements and demonstrate originality, creativity, and artistic expression that reflect the individuality of its creator.

When a work of art serves as a company logo, however, it is automatically excluded from copyright protection. This is because the court further determines that: “Logos with functional or practical elements that identify a company or product do not meet the criteria to qualify as copyrighted works” (Case No. KE 227/22, dated 27.03.2024, page 8). Therefore, it was decided that since the plaintiff’s logo was created to serve as an identifier for the plaintiff’s company, it does not qualify for protection under the Law on Copyright and Related Rights.

Automatically excluding a logo from copyright protection simply because it serves as a company’s logo does not align with the principles governing this field. Trademark protection does not preclude copyright protection, and vice versa. A work of art, such as a logo, can be protected as a trademark if registered with the competent administrative authority and used to identify the origin of goods or services offered by a business. However, it can also be protected by copyright for its creative aspect. While trademarks safeguard a logo’s distinctive function, copyright protects its artistic creativity.

Moreover, Article 5 of the current Copyright Law, as well as the previous Copyright Law referenced by the court, establish originality—the creative aspect—as the sole criterion for a work to qualify for copyright protection. The current law explicitly states that no other criteria can be applied to determine whether a work qualifies as a copyrighted work. This principle applies to all copyrighted works, including logos as works of art. Therefore, judicial practice should clearly and accurately reflect this principle of copyright law, even when the object under consideration is a work of art used as a company logo.Top of Form