The Criminal Framework of Copyright Protection
Infringement of copyright and neighbouring rights is criminalized in Georgia by a single norm — Article 189 of the Criminal Code — which simultaneously covers appropriation of authorship, coercion into co-authorship and large-scale piracy. The American Digital Millennium Copyright framework does not apply here: Georgian criminal liability is built on consequential thresholds — the amount of income and repetitiveness — and precisely these thresholds decide under which part of the article the case is punished.
Appropriation of Authorship and Coercion — the First Parts
The first part of the article governs the appropriation of authorship of an object of copyright, or coercion into co-authorship — the sanction is a fine or corrective labour for up to two years. The second part aggravates the same conduct where committed more than once: house arrest from six months to one year, or imprisonment for up to three years. These two parts protect personal, non-property interests — the author's name and the voluntariness of collaboration — and their protection requires no quantitative threshold: a single episode suffices. In practice, the question of qualification arises precisely on these parts: appropriation of authorship and unlawful use of a work are not the same — the former is the taking of a name, the latter a proprietary use — and different parts of the article are distributed over them differently. Where the prosecution confuses these two forms, the qualification changes and the defence gains a separate argument.
Large-Scale Infringement — the Third and Fourth Parts
The third part covers the property side: reproduction of a work, phonogram, videogram or database in breach of the Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights, or the unauthorized acquisition, import, storage, sale, rental, transfer of their copies, or other infringement of rights — committed for the purpose of receiving income in a large amount — punished by a fine or house arrest from one to two years. The fourth part aggravates the same conduct where committed for especially large income or by a group with prior conspiracy — imprisonment for up to three years. The note defines both thresholds numerically: a large amount exists where the value of the copies, or the income receivable under lawful use, exceeds five thousand GEL; especially large — ten thousand GEL. For the defence such thresholds create a concrete calculus: the prosecution must establish not only the infringement but also the purpose and the value criterion. The value criterion is twofold: either the value of the copies or — in the case of lawful use — the income receivable by the right-holder is calculated, and crossing the threshold of either one changes the qualification. The fourth part names two independent aggravating circumstances — the purpose of especially large income and commission by a group with prior conspiracy — and each of them alone suffices for the case to be assessed under this part.
Liability of a Legal Person
The second note to the article extends liability to the enterprise level: for the acts provided for by this article a legal person is punished by a fine, deprivation of the right to carry out activity, or liquidation and a fine. In practical terms this means that a case opened on grounds of piracy may for the company end in deprivation of the right to carry out activity or even liquidation, with a fine added on top of the organizational damage. Timely legal response is therefore decisive: the defence proceeds on two levels — the charges against the individual and the preservation of the company's right to carry on its activity.
Directions for the Defence
The defence in copyright cases proceeds mainly along four axes: the existence of the right and its holder — to whom the object belongs and whether the victim holds the right of use; the fact of infringement — whether the use breached the copyright law or fell within free use; the quantitative threshold — the calculation of value and the establishment of purpose; and the subjective side — knowledge and intent regarding the infringement. Each axis rests on expert assessment, and alternative expertise here frequently changes the outcome of the case. The boundary of free use deserves separate mention: the copyright law defines the cases where the use of a work without the right-holder's permission is lawful, and it is precisely the crossing of that boundary that separates lawful consumption from crime. Equally important is distinguishing the civil and criminal contours: the same facts may ground compensation in the civil order, whereas a criminal charge arises only where the above thresholds are satisfied — and moving between these two contours is the practitioner's daily work.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the punishment for appropriating authorship?
A fine or corrective labour up to two years; where committed more than once — house arrest from six months to one year or imprisonment up to three years.
What is a large amount?
Where the value of the copies or the income receivable under lawful use exceeds five thousand GEL; especially large — ten thousand GEL.
Which acts are punished under the third part?
Reproduction, unauthorized acquisition, import, storage, sale, rental or transfer of copies of works, phonograms, videograms or databases — for large income.
Is a legal person punishable?
Yes — by a fine, deprivation of the right to carry out activity, or liquidation and a fine.
When does the fourth part apply?
Where the conduct described in the third part is committed for the purpose of especially large income or by a group with prior conspiracy — the sanction is imprisonment for up to three years.
How We Help on Legal.ge
A copyright case requires combined analysis of ownership, rules of use and quantitative thresholds. On Legal.ge you can engage an intellectual-property and criminal-law lawyer who will protect your interests at every stage. Submit a request on the site and get qualified assistance.