Fair Use in the Copyright System
Copyright is not an absolute monopoly: the legislator limits it in the public interest and defines the cases where a work may be used without the author's consent and without payment of remuneration. This page is grounded in articles 21, 23, 24 and 26 of the copyright law — reproduction for personal use, use with mandatory attribution, the free use of works permanently located in public places, and reproduction for judicial proceedings. If a rights holder claims your use has crossed the line, a defence built on these norms is your principal instrument.
Reproduction by Natural Persons for Personal Use
Under article 21 of the law, a natural person may reproduce a lawfully published work, or a work lawfully made available to the public, exclusively for personal use, without the consent of the author or other copyright holder and without payment of remuneration. This norm does not extend, however, to the reproduction of architectural works in the form of buildings; electronic databases and computer programs — except for the cases provided for by other articles of the law; the reprographic reproduction of books in their entirety, of sheet music and of works of fine art; or the copying of an audiovisual work or a work recorded on a phonogram or videogram. These boundaries are precisely the points where a personal copy turns into unlawful use.
A special rule applies to copies of audiovisual works and works recorded on phonograms for personal use: in such reproduction the author or other rights holder is entitled to receive appropriate remuneration. This remuneration is paid by the manufacturers and importers of devices and material carriers used for personal-use reproduction and is collected and distributed by an accredited collective management organisation. No remuneration is charged for export items, professional equipment not intended for household use, or personal-purpose imports by a natural person. The right of reproduction does not extend to temporary copies.
Use Without Consent but With Attribution
Article 23 permits the use of a work without the author's consent and without remuneration, but with mandatory reference to the author and the source of borrowing. The norm covers quotation for scientific, research, polemical, critical and informational purposes to the extent justified by that purpose; short excerpts by way of illustration in publications, radio and television programmes and educational recordings; the reproduction or broadcasting of articles on current economic, political, social and religious topics published in periodicals, unless specially prohibited by the author, who retains the right of publication in a collection; the reproduction or broadcasting of a work seen or heard in the course of current events reporting to the extent justified by informational purposes; publicly delivered speeches, lectures, addresses and sermons, including words spoken in court proceedings, with the author retaining the exclusive right of separate publication in a collection; and the reproduction, without profit-seeking purposes, of works created for the blind in relief-point script or by other special means. Each permission is bounded by the test of justified extent.
Works in Public Places and Court Proceedings
Article 24 permits the reproduction or broadcasting of architectural, photographic and fine-art works permanently located in places open to free attendance, again without consent or remuneration. There are two exceptions: where the image of the work is the principal object of such reproduction or broadcast, and where it is used for profit-making purposes. In practical terms, a street photograph in which a building or monument plays a background role is generally permitted, while selling a photographic reproduction of the same monument already requires the author's consent. Article 26, in turn, permits the reproduction of a work for judicial proceedings without consent or remuneration, to the extent determined by that purpose — copying a fragment needed to substantiate a position in litigation is lawful.
Building the Defence in a Copyright Dispute
When a rights holder demands liability, the defence should rest on several questions: was the work lawfully published or made available to the public; what purpose did the use serve — quotation, illustration, information, personal use or judicial proceedings; was the extent of the use justified; and was the author and the source of borrowing indicated. The absence of attribution is often the only contested point — which is why correcting it before the dispute is resolved may be possible. Any use that does not fit within these articles requires the author's permission — other cases are governed by other provisions of the law and need separate analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
May I copy a book for personal use?
Reprographic duplication of books in their entirety is excluded from the personal-use exception, while copying individual pages is generally permitted — the purpose and extent of use are decisive here.
How much may be quoted?
Only to the extent justified by the purpose of quotation — scientific, research, polemical, critical and informational. The legislator has not fixed a rigid numerical limit for most uses, so the assessment of extent is individual in each case.
May a photograph of a street monument be used?
Yes — reproduction of architectural, photographic and fine-art works permanently located in places open to free attendance is permitted, unless the image is the principal object of the reproduction or is used for profit.
Is consent needed to prove a point in court?
No — reproduction of a work for judicial proceedings is allowed without remuneration, to the extent determined by that purpose.
How We Help on Legal.ge
The Legal.ge team assists in copyright disputes: we assess whether your use fits the statutory permissions, draft your defence position and guide you through negotiations or litigation. We explain the boundaries of reproduction, quotation and public use and help minimise the risk of damages. Contact us — your creative and academic freedom is protected by law. Legal.ge.