Has a competitor launched software whose screens look strangely like yours? Even where an interface is not protected by copyright, copying it can be penalised as free riding. Here is an explanation based on a matter recently handled by the law firm.
A SaaS software publisher consulted me after discovering that a competing tool had just arrived on the market. What it had in common with the publisher's own solution: almost everything. The same organisation of screens, the same menus, the same labels.
A significant detail: the people behind the new tool knew my client's platform perfectly well, having been users of it. What had taken my client months of work had been reproduced in a few weeks.
Not always, and that is where the question becomes interesting. In France, the principle is freedom of trade: a competitor may take inspiration from an idea or offer the same features. A search bar, filters or a column layout belong to everyone.
Copyright does not always come to the rescue of the copied publisher. To be protected, a screen must be original, which is difficult to show for a functional interface.
This is why the most suitable ground is often unfair competition and free riding.
Free riding consists in following in the wake of another company to benefit, at no cost, from its efforts and know-how. It engages the liability of its author under Article 1240 of the French Civil Code.
What is penalised is not the reuse of an isolated element. It is appropriating the result of another's work and investments. Two points make it particularly useful to software publishers:
A resemblance, however striking, is not enough. It must be shown that the competitor deliberately chose to copy rather than design. In this matter, several elements pointed that way.
Online software can be changed in a few hours. Before taking any step, a report by a commissaire de justice (bailiff) should therefore be obtained.
Other competitors offer the same service with a very different presentation. This shows there are many ways to design this type of tool, and that reproducing all of my client's choices was no coincidence.
My client could show the time and resources devoted to designing its interface. It is this value, the fruit of its work, that the competitor had appropriated.
To access the platform, every user had to accept terms of use prohibiting copying of the service. A simple clause that considerably strengthens the publisher's position. This is why well-drafted terms and conditions matter.
I sent a detailed formal notice, illustrated by screenshots from the bailiff's report. It demanded that use of the copied interface cease, a written undertaking not to repeat it, and compensation for my client's harm.
This is often a suitable first step: quick and inexpensive, it can allow the copying to be stopped without proceedings. Failing agreement, the matter can be brought before the court, including urgently.
In cases of free riding, the victim may seek an end to the practices, if necessary under a penalty payment, and damages. These may take into account the investments the copier saved. The judge may also order publication of the decision.
To go further, see my work on the legal protection of SaaS. These subjects are also closely examined by investors, as I explain in the case study on fundraising and intellectual property.
In principle yes: a feature belongs to no one. However, reproducing the interface as a whole, with its organisation and labels, may constitute free riding.
No. It is enough to show that the competitor appropriated the fruit of your work and investments.
A bailiff's report comparing the two interfaces, proof that your software existed beforehand, and anything showing the work invested.
Five years from the discovery of the facts. But the earlier you act, the easier it is to have the copying stopped.
Before reacting, secure the evidence: an interface can be modified in a few hours. I can help you assess the situation, have the copying recorded and choose a suitable strategy.
Contact me for an initial analysis of your matter.
