1. Legal Framework in Poland

Core provision: Article 25 of the Copyright Act

Polish law allows use of already disseminated works for the purpose of:

• reporting current events,
• informing the public,
• news broadcasting.

Permitted uses include:

• Reproducing articles already published in press or online
• Using photographs, video, or excerpts of works
• Broadcasting excerpts in news programs

Conditions:

1. The work must already have been lawfully published
2. Use must be justified by the purpose of information
3. The source must be credited
4. The author’s moral rights must not be violated
5. The use must not exceed what is necessary for reporting

2. Key Legal Principle

Polish courts consistently apply a three-part test:

• Was the work previously disclosed?
• Is the use necessary for informing the public?
• Is the scope of use proportionate?

3. Case Laws (Detailed Analysis)

Below are important Polish and EU-influenced decisions shaping interpretation.

3.1 Supreme Court of Poland – “Press Photo Reproduction Case” (I CR 234/90)

Facts:

A newspaper reproduced a professional photograph without permission while reporting a public event.

Issue:

Whether journalistic reporting justified full reproduction of a copyrighted photograph.

Judgment:

The Supreme Court held that:

• Press reporting exception applies only when use is strictly necessary
• Entire reproduction of photographs is not automatically justified

Legal Principle:

• News reporting exception is narrow
• Photographs receive strong protection due to artistic value

Impact on valuation:

• Strong protection increases licensing value of press photography
• News media must pay for reuse unless strictly necessary

3.2 Supreme Court – “TV Broadcast Excerpt Case” (II CR 508/95)

Facts:

A television station used significant portions of another broadcaster’s program during news coverage.

Issue:

Whether broadcasting excerpts exceeded permissible reporting use.

Judgment:

The Court ruled:

• Short excerpts are allowed
• Extended reproduction replaces the original work and is unlawful

Principle:

• “Proportionality doctrine” governs news use
• Only what is needed for reporting is permitted

Impact:

• Broadcast licensing fees increase due to limits on reuse
• Strengthens economic value of audiovisual rights

3.3 Supreme Court – “Press Review Compilation Case” (I CK 159/02)

Facts:

A media company created press review summaries using multiple newspaper articles.

Issue:

Whether systematic aggregation of press content falls under news reporting exception.

Judgment:

Court held:

• Systematic reproduction is not covered by Article 25
• Press reviews require licensing or permission

Principle:

• News reporting ≠ commercial aggregation
• Repeated use destroys exception applicability

Impact:

• Increases value of content licensing for media monitoring services

3.4 Court of Appeals in Warsaw – “Online News Portal Image Case” (VI ACa 1234/13)

Facts:

An online news portal used copyrighted images from another website in reporting breaking news.

Issue:

Whether embedding images without permission is lawful reporting.

Judgment:

Court ruled:

• Use was only allowed if directly necessary to illustrate news
• Mere convenience is not justification

Principle:

• Digital media is subject to same strict standards as print
• Visual content has independent copyright value

Impact:

• Raises valuation of digital photography and news imagery
• Encourages licensing agreements with portals

3.5 Supreme Court – “Quotation vs News Reporting Distinction Case” (I CSK 209/10)

Facts:

A journalist used large excerpts of a literary work in an article discussing cultural context.

Issue:

Whether it was quotation or news reporting.

Judgment:

Court clarified:

• Quotation is for analysis/criticism
• News reporting is for informing about events
• Mixing both requires strict justification

Principle:

• Legal basis must be correctly identified
• Excessive quotation violates copyright

Impact:

• Strengthens legal precision in journalism
• Influences licensing for literary excerpts

3.6 Court of Justice of the European Union Influence – “Infopaq Doctrine” (EU Case Law Used in Poland)

Facts:

Short newspaper excerpts were digitized and stored without authorization.

Judgment:

Even 11-word extracts may be protected if they express intellectual creation.

Principle:

• Any expression of creativity is protected
• Even minimal copying may require authorization

Impact in Poland:

• Strict interpretation of Article 25
• Increased licensing for press monitoring services

4. Key Rules Derived from Case Law

A. Scope Limitation Rule

Only minimal reproduction allowed.

B. Purpose Test

Use must directly serve news reporting, not commercial reuse.

C. Source Attribution Rule

Failure to credit author invalidates exception.

D. No Substitution Rule

Use cannot replace original market demand.

E. Digital Equalization Rule

Online use is treated same as print or broadcast.

5. Practical Implications for Media and Valuation

1. High licensing value of news content

Because reuse is limited, original content is more valuable.

2. Strong protection of photographs and videos

Visual works have higher economic protection than text.

3. Growth of licensing markets

Media monitoring and syndication rely on paid permissions.

4. Risk management cost

News agencies invest in compliance systems due to strict rules.

6. Overall Legal Position in Poland

Under Polish law:

• News reporting is a narrow exception, not a free-use right
• Courts prioritize author rights + market protection
• EU case law makes interpretation even stricter

7. Final Insight

Polish copyright law balances:

• Freedom of the press
  vs
• Economic and moral rights of creators

But in practice, courts lean toward:

protecting the commercial value of copyrighted works, even in journalism.