On a website, different original content may be individually protected by copyright. This will be the case for the texts, images, pictures, logos, and software that are included on the website.

Moreover, when the website is (or contains) a database, the content of this database, even where is not original, may be protected by the sui generis database right

The web site as a whole may be protected by different means:

• Protection as a global work by copyright
  
  
• Protection as an original database by copyright
  
  
• Protection as an audiovisual work
  
  

These forms of protection may be cumulative.

When several persons have jointly participated in creating the website by providing an original contribution, they will all be considered co-authors.

The legal regime of joint ownership is complex and differs significantly from one Member State to another. Therefore, we advise you to refer to the guide specifically dedicated to this matter 10 .

You can decide to host the website yourself, but this will require the necessary technical equipment and good technical knowledge.

On the other hand, you may entrust the task to a company that offers hosting services.

For this, a hosting contract should be entered into whereby the service provider (hosting company) offers you a memory space and processing capacity using its equipment.

There are free hosting services on the Internet, but in most cases, they present disadvantages (compulsory advertising on the website, smaller memory space…). For both the free services and other paid ones, it is important to carefully read the related contract. In particular, there can be some technical restraints that you have to respect (maximum volume, type of content, use of specific equipment, etc…).

The tremendous network that is the Internet, , requires a unique localising system enabling each of its elements to be accessed (for example a PC, server, rooter or webpage)..

Therefore, any machine connected to the Internet receives an IP address composed of 4 numbers between 0 and 255. Anybody who writes this address in the browser (Netscape Communicator or Microsoft Internet Explorer) will then enter the associated website.

A second type of address has been created in order to help the user to remember addresses more easily and to render surfing more intuitive. Often, the IP address corresponds the site owner or content, for example: www.ipr-helpdesk.org.

Therefore, when going online, you will also need a domain name address in order to be visited by users.

There are two types of extensions (TLD: Top Level Domain) for domain names:

• generic extensions which are linked to the type of activity (".com" for commercial companies, ".org" for the non-commercial registrants); and
  
  
• territorial extensions which are theoretically linked to geographic locations (".be" for Belgium, ".fr" for France, ".uk" for the United Kingdom…).
  
  

It should be noted thatthe categories are as yet purely theoretical: indeed, a domain name with a ".uk" extension may refer to a server located in the USA while a ".com" may be used for a personal web page without any commercial purpose.

Using metatags when creating a webpage will allow the website to be indexed on a search engine. Metatags generally contain a list of keywords describing the content of the website.

The choice of the metatags can be limited by third party rights. Indeed, it is unfair competition and considered as misleading advertising to include the name of a competitor. To include the trademark of a third party may be considered counterfeiting.

Therefore, a safe attitude is to avoid keywords whose sole purpose is to increase the number of visits to a website.

You may be tempted to put scanned (digitised) pictures on your web site in order to make it more visually appealing. Can you scan an analogical picture and insert it freely on your website? Two hypotheses have to be distinguished:

1. If you have taken the picture yourself (a picture of your holiday, family, car collection, etc.), you will be the copyright holder. You can therefore freely reproduce it and communicate it to the public through your website so long as the subject of the picture is not itself also protected by copyright (picture of another picture, of a painting or of a sculpture). If this is the case, you will need to obtain the prior authorisation of the this subject's copyright holder.
   
   Be aware: the difficulties do not stop here! In some countries, if you take a picture of a person, you will have to respect the right to personal portrayal ( droit à l'image) of this person. This right, which is not directly linked to copyright, will allow any person photographed to prevent the reproduction (notably on the Internet) and communication to the public (notably through the Internet) of the picture. In this situation, you will need the prior consent of the photographed person. There are some exceptions to this principle for public personalities and a private person photographed in a crowd.
   
   
2. If you scan (digitalise) a picture that you have found in a book or magazine, this picture will probably be protected by a third party's copyright. Indeed, the criteria of originality for such works will usually be fulfilled in the eyes of judges. The act of scanning is an act of reproduction. The reproduction is subject to the copyright holder's exclusivity right. Therefore, before scanning the picture, you will need to obtain the prior consent of the photographer (or the person to whom he has assigned his rights). Furthermore, you may also have to obtain the consent of the person photographed (if any) or/and of the copyright holder of the subject photographed (if copyrighted).
   
   

Beware! The fact that you have bought a picture or the negatives does not give you any intellectual property rights thereto. You must still respect the rights of others.

As with pictures, you may wish to include some images (such as amusing images or a comic strip) on your website in order to make it more attractive. The same principles explained above with regard to pictures are to be applied here. You are not allowed to scan an image and include it on your website without having obtained the copyright holder's prior consent. Conversely, you can freely use an image or drawing that you have created yourself, unless it is the portrait of a recognizable person ( in order to respect his droit à l'image or right to personal portrayal).

In the other cases, the image will be protected by copyright if it is original, which will often be the case and, therefore, you will need to obtain the prior consent of the copyright holder. You will also have to obtain the subject's consent according to the right to personal portrayal (or droit à l'image). Independently from copyright, the image may also be protected by trademark law.

Therefore, the cases in which you can freely exploit an image without first seeking consent are rare, unless the images are purely your own creations.

The text may be written by you or scanned from an existing text and re-used as an image or text after using character recognition software. May you put any type of text on your website? Once again, the answer is negative.

As we have already explained, a text may be protected by copyright if it is original. The length of the text does not matter (a slogan, a few lines or pages) neither the medium in which it is originally expressed (paper, floppy disk, CD-ROM, website, etc.).

There is no problem if you are the author of the text, meaning that you have created the content of the text. The fact of copying an existing text obviously does not imply that you are its author.

Conversely, if the text is protected by another's copyright, it cannot be reproduced on a website without the author's consent.

This hypothesis does not deal with digitising a work from an analogical medium (a paper document) but refers to the case where a website contains a work (an image, for example) and this image is downloaded by a surfer who places it on his own website and so (re)disseminates it by Internet.

The famous Copy/Paste function offered by numerous software packages permits a huge amount of data available on other websites (texts, images, pictures, etc.) to be collected in a very short space of time. This technical function allowing very simple reproduction must be used carefully as regards copyright.

Indeed, the fact of copying or downloading a work is an act of reproduction and its dissemination on the Internet is a form of communication to the public. Such acts of reproduction and communication to the public are covered by copyright. Therefore, if the work is protected by copyright, as will generally be the case, the prior consent of the author must, in principle, be obtained.

Some existing software allows you to modify a picture or image (by modifying the size, colour, form, contrast, view, framing, etc.) so that the modified image no longer looks like the original. In this case, are you exempted from requesting the copyright holder's authorization (where the image was protected by copyright and is therefore original)?

The answer is No! Even if the new image no longer looks much like the original image, you cannot use it as you please. Indeed, in order to transform the image with software, you must first carry out an act of reproduction (either by scanning or using the copy/paste function), requiring the copyright holder's consent, except if it is covered by the private copy exception. Moreover, the fact of modifying the image with the software also requires the copyright holder's authorization.

Even if it is true that it is often difficult for an author to find all the infringements of his rights, today there are some technical copyright protection systems (watermarking, for example) which allow a digital work to be identified and easily located on the Internet, even if it has been greatly modified.

However, if the modified image does not look at all like the original image, there will be no infringement.

In order to deal with this very topical question and to simplify the problem, we have limited our analysis to musical files encoded in MP3.

No, not necessarily. The fact that a copyright mention appears or not on a work does not imply the existence or absence of copyright protection. Indeed, protection exists from the mere fact of the creation and therefore, the only conditions for its existence are the requirements of originality and expression in a particular form. The absence of a copyright mention, does not mean it may be copied freely. You will have to obtain the copyright holder's authorization if the work is protected.

Nevertheless, as regards the question of proof, a copyright mention ( Copyright, 'name' - 'year') may be very useful if you include one of your creations (text, pictures, etc) on your website, which will probably be covered by copyright. Indeed, the name of a person that appears on a work is presumed to be that of the copyright holder.

On the Internet, there are often some databases containing works (pictures, images or software) which are said to be "Copyright free" and available to be reproduced freely. For software, we also talk about "freeware" (free software) or "shareware" (software freely distributed for testing purposes by the users. After a test period, the user has to conclude a licence in order to continue using it, or decide to stop using it).

Do such statements imply that the pictures, images or software are not protected by copyright? The answer is, in principle, no. Indeed, if the work is original and the duration of protection has not expired, it is protected by copyright. The mention "copyright free" does not change that. Nevertheless, the statement means that the copyright holder is granting a free use licence.

In this hypothesis, you must take two elements into account:

• On the one hand, the use licence does not imply that you can do whatever you want: the databases generally define the types of use authorised (generally excluding the use of the content for commercial purposes).
  
  
• On the other hand, the person who appears as the copyright holder may not in fact not be it. In this case, the true author may appear and refuse that his work be used. The user's good faith cannot be used against the right owner (good faith does not counteract counterfeiting!).
  
  

When you create a website, you will probably make one or more links to other websites (or to a particular page of another website). In this case, should you seek authorisation from the owner of the website to which the link is made?

It seems not to be the case. In general, this type of act does not create any copyright related problems. Even if this issue is still discussed by jurists, the current trend is that any website owner is presumed to have given tacit consent authorizing other persons to make hyperlinks to his website on condition that the hyperlink is simple, and that it goes to the homepage (and not to another page of the site). In any event, you should avoid making links to websites containing illegal or prejudicial content (websites involving counterfeiting, revisionism or pornography).

On the contrary, if you are using other hyperlink techniques which are not considered "simple", you must be careful about the possible legal consequences. For example, a hyperlink containing the titles (protected by copyright!) of press articles and systematic links to the website publishing the articles. This practise may be judged unfair competition ( parasitism) and/or a breach of copyright.

The use of "deep links" may also cause problems. This type of hyperlink links directly to a page "deep" within the website, and therefore go directly beyond the home page. Some website owners have stated that it is a prejudicial practise only if the home page contains publicity banners avoided by a deep link.

Framing (use of frame, windows) combined with hyperlinks should also be used cautiously. You should avoid misleading the public about the real owner of the website. For example, it is possible to imagine a hyperlink in a window (frame) which links to a poem on another website. When the user clicks on it, the page containing the poem may appear in such a way that he or she has no way of knowing that they are viewing another website and thinks that the poem is yours. You should avoid this kind of practice or try to obtain the authorization of the owner of the linked website.

As explained in the previous answer, the website owner is generally considered to have given tacit consent to link to his web page.

Nevertheless, there is a limitation to this principle. You may always refuse a hyperlink when its context causes you harm. This could be the case, for example, of a hyperlink to your website that is presented on a pornographic or revisionist website, or that is contained in a sentence having a denigrating or insulting content. The hyperlink may also, according to its context, be judged as misleading advertising (which is forbidden). The hyperlink used to benefit from your work will also be considered as prejudicial (you have created a website with previously unpublished pictures on alpinism and another person creates a website, without any content, but systematically linking to the pictures on your website and thus creating confusion of ownership for the public).

Since there are prejudicial consequences that may arise from the use of hyperlinks, some websites state this kind of specific clause in their general conditions in order to avoid the problem: "Any user accepts to ask for the authorisation of the website owner before making any hyperlinks, of any nature, to this website" or "The insertion, without authorization, of direct links to this web page, or to files or applications available on this website, is forbidden".

Failure to respect the above principles may be subject to penal or civil sanctions (such as a fine).

Such sanctions may appear theoretical since counterfeiting on the Internet is so common and the risk of being sued seems to very low. However, technical mechanisms are increasingly being used to identify protected works and to find, with the help of an automatic search engine, the counterfeiter on the Internet. Moreover, some professional organizations or collecting societies do not hesitate to use such mechanisms to protect their members' rights. Numerous jurisdictions have already sanctioned persons who have included copyrighted works on their websites.

Copyright exists only from the moment of creation. Indeed, expression in a particular concrete form is a condition for the existence of protection. Therefore, ideas, methods, and concepts, even great ones, cannot be protected by copyright.

From the moment that the website or the elements included therein are perceptible for the senses, they will be considered as expressed in a particular form. This would be the case of a website copied on a hard disk, a CD-ROM or drafted on paper.

The best way to avoid a website idea that hasn't already been expressed in a particular form from being stolen is to keep it secret until it has been expressed.

It is important to know that even if protection exists by the mere fact of creation, as with any formality, it is very important to retain some proof about the ownership and date of creation. For this, you may depose a copy of your project with a trusted third party, such as a notary or collecting society.

In order to benefit from copyright protection, no formality (of filing or registration) is required. Copyright protection exists, in effect, from the mere act of creation.

Nevertheless, if the absence of formality makes copyright very flexible, it becomes a weakness in the event of a dispute. Indeed, if two people claim for copyright protection for an identical work, how can the anteriority of a certain creation be proven?

The mention COPYRIGHT (enabling the author to be identified, such as the statement " © Copyright Name of author"), is absolutely not mandatory to enjoy copyright protection. It does however become very useful in the event of a dispute since it constitutes a presumed ownership right.

In order to prove the anteriority of your rights to a work, filing a copy with a trust third party, like a notary or collecting society, is highly recommended.