Protecting the artist's image and reputation

In today’s music industry, an artist’s image, reputation, and community engagement are strategic assets that are just as valuable as their economic rights.

Under these circumstances, damage to an artist’s image and/or reputation is likely to have not only moral but also, and above all, economic consequences—particularly regarding the promotion and streaming of their catalog on digital streaming platforms, their tour revenue, their artistic collaborations, and their partnerships andendorsement contracts.

Below is an overview of the legal grounds that an artist may invoke to have disputed content removed, to stop its use, to set the record straight, and to protect their reputation.

It is important to keep in mind that the goal is not always to initiate litigation, but rather to adapt the strategy based on the nature, intensity, and progression of the attack, while simultaneously managing crisis communications.

Article 9 of the Civil Code enshrines and protects an artist’s right to privacy, image, and reputation.

It allows him to object to any unauthorized use of his personal attributes, including his surname, pseudonym, and likeness, subject to legitimate public interest.

➤ For example, this tool could be used in cases of unauthorized use of a photograph depicting the individual or in cases where their image is used by generative artificial intelligence.

Note: Protecting the artist’s voice is more challenging in this context, and it is therefore advisable to adopt a robust contractual strategy that clearly defines the scope of the permitted uses and expressly excludes the use of the artist’s performances for the purpose of training artificial intelligence systems.

Under Article 1240 of the Civil Code, parasitism penalizes the improper capture and appropriation of the economic value of an asset.

When applied to an artist, this tool helps protect the value associated with the artist’s name, image, reputation, and the artist’s community engagement against exploitation by third parties seeking to gain an unfair economic advantage.

➤ In practice, this refers to a situation in which a company publicly exploits an artist’s name and/or image to promote a service and imply a fictitious partnership, or to a rising artist who announces a fake artistic collaboration in order to benefit, without any effort or investment of their own, from the value associated with the image of their alleged collaborator.

Parasitism falls under the general law of tort liability and serves to protect intangible assets that are not covered by intellectual property law. It thus differs, in particular, from trademark infringement, which often requires a demonstration of a likelihood of confusion among the public.

Defamation, on the other hand, involves the dissemination of inaccurate, disproportionate, unjustified, unfounded, and unfair allegations with the intent to discredit the artist in the eyes of the public and their business partners.

This tool must be used with caution and requires a careful analysis of the nature of the disputed allegations in order to avoid the risk of a potential defamation claim being reclassified (which involves the allegation of a specific fact that damages the reputation of an identified individual and falls under the special provisions of the 1881 Law on Freedom of the Press).

Once again, contractual measures—and specifically the inclusion of non-disparagement clauses in contracts (such as management, partnership, and service agreements)—serve as a first line of defense against this type of attack.

In any event, the pursuit of legal action regarding the disputed remarks must not result in the curtailment of the author’s freedom of expression, and in particular his right to freely express criticism.

Defamation is punishable when “any allegation or imputation of a fact that damages the honor or reputation of the person or entity to whom the fact is attributed” is made, provided that the fact in question is specific, capable of being proven, and subject to adversarial debate (Article 29, paragraph 1, of the 1881 Act)

➤ In practice, this tool is likely to be used, in particular, when an artist is the subject of false and public accusations of copyright infringement, violence, or any other offense that has not been the subject of a court ruling.

Defamation is governed by a special body of law that establishes procedural rules deviating from general law, including a three-month statute of limitations starting from the date the disputed statements were made.

Unlike defamation, verbal abuse does not rely on the allegation of a specific fact but on an offensive, contemptuous, or insulting statement that damages the honor or reputation of the person it targets (Article 29, paragraph 2, of the 1881 Act).

➤ This may include, for example, viral insults targeting an artist; a feud that goes beyond artistic rivalry and escalates into genuine personal attacks that are harmful to the recipient; or a montage that is particularly degrading.

The line between defamation, slander, and legitimate criticism can be extremely fine, and an initial misclassification can prove fatal—especially given the three-month statute of limitations, which precludes any procedural rectification.

It is therefore essential to carefully examine the context in which the statements were made, to determine whether the author acted with malicious intent, and to determine whether there is a specific fact that could be subject to adversarial debate.

The effectiveness of the legal response to an attack on an artist’s image and reputation depends less on the breadth of the available legal arsenal than on its timely initiation and judicious use.

Up front, it is essential to protect the artist through a contract against any use of their personal attributes that could be harmful to them.

Downstream, determining the appropriate measures will depend on the nature of the attack, the urgency of the situation, and the objective at hand.

While notifying platforms may be sufficient to secure the removal of unquestionably illegal content, legal proceedings will be necessary to obtain compensation for the moral and economic damages suffered, whether through the payment of damages or a court order requiring publication.

In any case, the preservation of evidence (time-stamped screenshots, reports by a judicial officer), the identification of the perpetrators and the applicable liability regime, and the legal characterization of the facts will be critical to the success of the measures implemented.

From contract prevention to crisis management, our team is here to help you protect your image, reputation, and artistic identity.