Clear copyright ownership is crucial, whether you're buying or developing intellectual property (IP). After the recent Supreme Court ruling in Sweden, Norway and Sweden handle copyright transfers differently. This may impact businesses significantly. The key difference revolves around the "specificity principle," which determines how explicitly rights must be stated in contracts.
Copyright in Norway: Only what’s specified is transferred
The general rule is that an agreement is to be construed in accordance with the parties' mutual understanding at the time the agreement was entered into. If the parties do not share a common understanding, the agreement must be interpreted in a way that objectively appears reasonable and sensible. The latter principle is in Norway modified by the specificity principle within the field of copyright.
The specificity principle stipulates that only those rights explicitly mentioned in a contract are considered transferred, in accordance with the Norwegian Copyright Act § 69. If the contract is unclear, the benefit of the doubt usually goes to the original creator, which is why it’s so important to be specific about what’s being transferred in terms of copyright.
The specificity principle applies primarily in situations where contract terms regarding the copyright transfer are unclear. In contrast, if an agreement clearly expresses which rights have been transferred, based on its wording and purpose, this clarity is decisive.
The principle particularly benefits creators when they are in a weaker negotiating position or have a close personal connection to their work.
While Norwegian law does not require written agreements, clearly documented terms are highly recommended to specify precisely what rights are transferred and to avoid future disputes.
Example scenario:
A Norwegian company contracts a software developer to create a custom e-commerce platform, stating only that the company "obtains rights to use the software." Later, the company wants to license the software commercially or adapt it into a mobile app. Due to the specificity principle, these additional rights remain with the developer, highlighting the critical importance of explicitly defining each intended use, including commercial licensing, adaptations, and distribution channels.
Copyright in Sweden: From specificity to objective interpretation
Sweden used to take the same approach as Norway, requiring contracts to be clear about which rights were transferred. But that changed with a recent Supreme Court ruling (Case T 5449-23, known as the “Deckarserien” case.) The court ruled that contracts and copyright disputes in contracts should be interpreted like any other contract — by construing the wording objectively, the context, and what the parties likely intended. As a result, ambiguities no longer automatically benefit the creator. This makes the outcome less predictable and can lead to more complicated disputes.
Example scenario:
A Swedish entrepreneur purchases rights to training manuals without specifying their intended use. Later, when these manuals are developed into online courses, the original writer demands additional compensation, arguing digital rights weren't included. Under Sweden's current interpretive rules, courts will examine the original intent, context, and contractual wording to resolve this ambiguity.
Practical copyright advice for businesses
Both Norway and Sweden illustrate that unclear contracts are risky and potentially costly. To mitigate such risks:
- Detail all intended uses clearly: Specify rights comprehensively (digital, print, translation, adaptations, sublicensing).
- Plan for future applications: Explicitly cover potential future applications to avoid later disagreements.
- Clarify employee contractor rights: Clearly address IP ownership, especially for independent contractors, as these rights do not automatically transfer.
Copyright clarity in the Nordics – key takeaways
Understanding Norway's protective specificity principle and Sweden’s shift toward general contract interpretation is crucial for businesses managing IP rights.
Clear contracts help avoid misunderstandings and put everyone on the same page from the start.
Whether you're working across borders or commissioning creative work locally, knowing the legal landscape — and adjusting your agreements accordingly — is key to securing the rights you actually need.
