The article examines how video games are treated under EU intellectual property (IP) law and questions whether they should be given a specific legal definition or even a sui generis (unique) legal status. Despite their massive growth and cultural importance, video games remain undefined in EU law, largely due to their hybrid nature. They combine multiple elements, such as code, music, visuals, and storytelling, each potentially protected under different IP regimes, which complicates their legal classification and authorship attribution.
Currently, the EU approaches video games through a “distributive” framework, treating them as both computer programs and audiovisual works under existing directives. This fragmented protection creates legal uncertainty, especially in an industry characterized by collaboration, reuse of content, and emerging trends like user-generated content and AI integration. It also poses challenges for enforcement across jurisdictions and can disadvantage smaller developers who lack legal expertise, while large companies often rely on contractual mechanisms to secure IP rights.
The article explores whether a unified legal definition could improve clarity and fairness, particularly for smaller actors. However, it warns that rigid definitions might hinder innovation in a rapidly evolving technological landscape. As an alternative, it suggests introducing a sui generis right – similar to database protection – to safeguard the significant time and financial investments involved in game development.
In conclusion, the article argues that any future EU legal framework should strike a balance between legal certainty and flexibility, ensuring fair protection for creators while supporting innovation and maintaining the EU’s competitiveness in the global gaming industry.
Author: Elie Dessy, Research Associate, KUL CiTiP
Full article available on the KUL CiTiP blog: here