What evidence is needed to win a copyright dispute in EU courts?

In EU copyright disputes, a claimant typically must prove: (1) the work is protected by copyright: it meets the originality threshold (reflecting the author's intellectual creation, CJEU C-5/08 Infopaq standard); (2) the claimant is the author or exclusive rights-holder, often established by authorship presumption if your name appears on the work, or by an assignment chain; (3) the defendant's work infringes: substantial similarity plus access; (4) you have standing to bring the claim. For creation date proof (particularly important when authorship is disputed), a qualified electronic timestamp under eIDAS Art. 41 creates a legal presumption of the creation date without requiring further authentication. This is the single most legally efficient way to establish creation timeline.

How does a qualified electronic timestamp help in copyright litigation?

In copyright litigation, the party claiming infringement must establish that they created the work before the defendant. A qualified electronic timestamp provides: (1) a legal presumption under eIDAS Art. 41(2) that the timestamped document existed at the recorded date, meaning the defendant must disprove this, not the claimant prove it; (2) cryptographic integrity proof that the document was not altered after timestamping; (3) a record from an independent, accredited QTSP on the EU Trusted List, and courts recognise this as objective third-party evidence. Combined with version history (git commits, design file versions) and internal communications, a qualified timestamp is the foundational evidence of creation date in any copyright proceeding.

What is the originality requirement for copyright protection in Switzerland?

In Switzerland, copyright under the URG/LDA (Urheberrechtsgesetz / Loi sur le droit d'auteur) protects literary and artistic works that are individual creations, i.e., they reflect the author's individual creative choices and are distinguishable from other works. The threshold is relatively accessible: individual expression in photographs, software, architecture, and artistic works is sufficient. The Federal Supreme Court (BGer/TF) applies a functional analysis: whether the work shows the author's personality through creative choices. There is no registration requirement; copyright arises automatically at creation. A qualified electronic timestamp from a ZertES-accredited provider documents both the date of creation and the exact content of the work.

Can I sue for copyright infringement in Switzerland if the infringer is in the EU?

Yes. Swiss courts have jurisdiction over copyright infringement claims where: the infringing activity causes harm in Switzerland, or the infringer has assets or operations in Switzerland. For EU-based infringers, you can also sue in EU member state courts, which can often be advantageous if the CJEU's originality standard and available remedies are more favourable. Switzerland and the EU are both members of the Berne Convention and WIPO Copyright Treaty, so your copyright is protected in both jurisdictions. Cross-border enforcement is most practical through specialist IP lawyers in both jurisdictions. Swiss-issued qualified electronic timestamps are accepted in EU proceedings because they meet eIDAS technical standards.

What is the statute of limitations for copyright infringement in Switzerland?

Under Swiss law, claims for copyright infringement have a limitation period of 3 years from when the claimant knew or should have known of the infringement and the infringer (relative limitation), with an absolute limitation of 10 years from the infringement act (Art. 60 OR, applicable to IP by reference). For ongoing infringements, the limitation period runs from the last infringing act. In EU member states, limitation periods vary: Germany (3 years), France (3 years), Italy (5 years). For registering copyright disputes: preserve all evidence, including the work itself, creation date proof (qualified timestamps), correspondence showing infringement, and evidence of damages, starting from the moment you discover infringement. Evidence of early creation date is most valuable in disputes that arise years after the original work was created.

Legal Compliance

Preuves de litige de droit d'auteur : Ce qu'acceptent les tribunaux de l'UE et de Suisse (2026)

Swiss Trust Layer Legal Team · Trust & Compliance

16 juin 2026 8 min de lectureDernière mise à jour 8 septembre 2026

Retour au Blog

In short

Toutes les preuves numériques n'ont pas le même poids dans les procédures de droit d'auteur de l'UE et suisses. Seuls les horodatages qualifiés émis par un QTSP portent une présomption légale — voici ce que les tribunaux acceptent réellement et pourquoi.

En janvier 2026, un avocat specialise en propriete intellectuelle a Zurich a accepte un dossier qui semblait solide a premiere vue. Une chercheuse UX basee a Berne avait documente un modele d'interaction proprietaire dans un article de methodologie detaille, pour le retrouver ensuite presque mot pour mot dans le depot de brevet d'un concurrent huit mois plus tard. La chercheuse disposait d'e-mails et de brouillons PDF remontant a dix-huit mois. Aucun ne portait un horodatage electronique qualifie. Selon le standard de preuve complete du Code de procedure civile suisse (ZPO), les preuves etaient insuffisantes. Le litige a ete regle pour 12 pour cent du montant initialement reclame.

Lorsqu'un litige en matiere de droit d'auteur arrive devant un tribunal, l'issue depend souvent non pas de qui a raison, mais de qui peut le prouver. Ce guide explique exactement ce que les tribunaux de l'UE et de la Suisse acceptent comme preuves en matiere de droits d'auteur et pourquoi les horodatages qualifies sont le facteur decisif dans les litiges de propriete intellectuelle modernes.

Protégez votre travail avec Swiss Trust Layer AG

Scellez votre propriété intellectuelle avec un e-Sceau prouvé en justice, soutenu par Swisscom Trust Services.

Réserver une Démo Gratuite

Articles similaires