From paper to screen: the moral right of integrity as a limit to film adaptation

In this forum, Eduardo del Río Dutú, lawyer in Bardají & Honrado, part of the global phenomenon of the adaptation of 'Wuthering Heights' to analyze the legal framework for the adaptation of cinematographic works to audiovisual formats, in which "adaptations" and "reinterpretations" can find limits to creativity.

On February 13, the eighth film adaptation of Emily Brontë's novel was released Wuthering Heights with a very good reception at the box office, raising 82 million dollars in the United States in just three days and 1.8 million in Spain, in its first weekend. Although the magnitude of these figures may be surprising, the truth is that the film adaptations of successful literary works They are usually used as a means to ensure a minimum of profits and even more so if said film adaptation is led by the media pull of Margot Robbie y Jacob Elord.

This issue has long since ceased to go unnoticed by producers who, more and more frequently, seek Secure your rights to literary works to bring them to the big screen. In fact, the French Institute of Spain, in its latest report regarding the impact of literary adaptations on the Spanish audiovisual industry, estimated that 1 in every 6 theatrical releases were film productions from literary adaptations.

It is inevitable to ask if the authorization of author to adapt his work, he grants the production company a blank check to produce the film without needing to respect the original story.

However, the good reception at the box office has not been reflected in the reviews received by the film. Much of the public has not been able to tolerate the differences between the film and the original novel, which in some way seems to have distorted Emily Brontë's story: from the replacing the repression of desire with explicit physical contact, until the suppression of key characters for the development of the plot o to obvious to sweetening and romanticization of the relationship between the protagonists.

In any case, it is not strange for a film adaptation to distance itself from the literary work from which it claims to be inspired. Often, this responds both to the difficulty which means transferring what is written to what is visible, to the modernization in search of greater empathy in young audiences or the director's urgent need to leave his imprint personal.

In this context, it is inevitable to ask if the authorization of author to adapt his work, he grants the production company a blank check to produce the film without the need to respect the original story and limit itself to taking advantage of isolated elements, such as the title or the names of the characters.

---

The film adaptation of a literary work: The right of transformation as a necessary budget

Article 21 of TRLPI regulates the transformation right, which grants the right to the author of the literary work to authorize its adaptation and cinematographic reproduction. This right has a double aspect: on the one hand, the positive side, consisting of the power or right to create cinematographic works based on a literary work; and, on the other, the negative side, consisting of prevent unauthorized third parties from modifying the literary work. Therefore, in order to adapt a literary work and transform it into a film, it will be necessary to obtain the consent of its author.

That said, to understand that we are facing a true transformation of the literary work, and not a mere inspiration, it will be necessary for the film to respect the ideological content of the literary work, as well as its viewing give the viewer the impression that they are seeing something they already know.

---

The moral right of integrity as a limit to creative freedom

However, the above does not imply that once the author of the literary work transfers the right of transformation to a production company for its film adaptation, they can be carried out. all intended modifications, since it depends on how an act of transformation is carried out, the moral right of the author may be violated.

No matter how much the author of a novel authorizes its film adaptation, it will find its limits in respect for the right to the integrity of the work. Nevertheless, This situation rarely arises in practice.

To limit possible transformations that may affect a work, the TRLPI grants the author the right of integrity of the work, which is a moral right, inherent to the author himself, inalienable and inalienable. That is, the author You will not be able to assign this right to the producer and, consequently, it will have to respect the integrity of the literary work on which the film adaptation is intended to be made. In this sense, the right to integrity of the work is the author's power to grant allows you to prevent any deformation, alteration or modification of your creation that damages its reputation or harms its legitimate interests.

Therefore, no matter how much the author of a novel authorizes its film adaptation, it will find its limits in respect for the right to the integrity of the work. Nevertheless, This situation rarely arises in practice., since in many productions the author himself has an active role in the creative process, being able to review those aspects that, in his opinion, could distort the original meaning of the story.

---

Public domain and persistence of moral rights

Having made it clear that the film adaptation of a literary work generally requires the authorization of its author, this requirement disappears when the work has entered public domain, that is, once seventy years have passed since his death.

Despite the entry into the public domain of the work, the Moral right persists in an imprescriptible manner and can be exercised by the author's heirs.

In such cases, it will not be necessary for the producer to obtain the right of transformation, since the work may be freely used (as happens, precisely, in the case of “Wuthering Heights”). However, this does not imply that the right to the integrity of the work has expired since, despite the entry into the public domain of the work, this Moral right persists in an imprescriptible manner and can be exercised by the author's heirs.

Thus, the right to integrity stands as the maximum defender of the interests of the author, even when its creation has entered the public domain and is the subject of a film adaptation. However, determining whether a cinematographic work has violated the right of integrity is a slippery criterion, difficult both to define in the abstract and to apply in practice.

---

The scarcity of jurisprudential criteria

In Spain, the judicial pronouncements that allow defining when a film adaptation violates the moral right of integrity of a literary work are scarce. This lack of consolidated criteria It turns its practical application into uncertain terrain, in which each case must be analyzed taking into account specific circumstances.

One of the most relevant precedents is the ruling of the Provincial Court of Madrid of July 5, 2002, which deals with the film adaptation of the novel by Javier Marías all the souls, which was given the name The Last Voyage of Robert Rylands. The court concluded that the film distanced itself from the original text "and this in substance", by not respecting the spirit of the work. Consequently, he understood that the adaptation exceeded the admissible limits of the right of transformation, condemning the production company to pay compensation and to remove the author's name from the credits.

Although he right of integrity occupies a central position within the European copyright system, as demonstrated by its imprescriptibility together with the right of paternity, the The scarcity of resolutions and the absence of uniform criteria make their invocation difficult.

Comparative experience at the European level offers equally illustrative examples. Thus, the Higher Regional Court of Munich heard the request for precautionary measures presented by Michael Ende, author of The Neverending Story, in front of the production company Neue Constantin Film for their disagreement with the ending introduced in the film adaptation. The court considered that the film significantly altered the substance of the novel, infantilizing the story and ignoring its psychological dimension. Nevertheless, denied precautionary measures requested since the author had previously accepted an alternative ending and in view of the serious economic damage that would result in paralyzing the exploitation of the work.

For its part, the French Court of Cassation, in its ruling of June 12, 2001 regarding the audiovisual adaptation of The Little Prince, addressed a claim filed by the heirs of Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, who claimed that the film version distorted the original work despite there being an adaptation contract. The court recognized the special protection of moral rights, but he specified that it is only violated when the spirit of the work or the essential characteristics of its characters are altered. By faithfully reproducing the plot and the personality of the protagonist, although added new characters, it was concluded that the director's creative contributions did not constitute a violation of the right of integrity.

In short, although the right of integrity occupies a central position within the European copyright system, as demonstrated by its imprescriptibility together with the right of paternity, the scarcity of resolutions and the absence of uniform criteria make their invocation difficult against film adaptations that may deviate from the spirit of the original novel.

---

Europe versus the Anglo-Saxon model

However, the very existence and regulation of the right to integrity in the European system has an important deterrent effect against those who seek to take advantage of the entry into the public domain of a literary work to exploit its reputation through film adaptations that completely distort the spirit conceived by its author.

He contrast with the Anglo-Saxon model is especially significant. Unlike what happens in Europe, where moral rights retain a central position, in traditional systems common law its recognition exists, but appears conditioned by numerous exceptions, sectoral limitations and even the possibility of resignation by the author. Thus, if at the European level its invocation is complex due to the scarcity of resolutions and the lack of uniform criteria, in the Anglo-Saxon system becomes practically unviable.

A paradigmatic example is found in certain film adaptations produced from works recently incorporated into the public domain. In this context, the producer Jagged Edge Productions, seems to have converted the Leveraging these classics into your own creative monopoly, systematically exploiting rights-released titles to produce B movies like Winnie the Pooh: honey and blood, Peter Pan: A Nightmare Neverland o Bambi: Revenge, reinterpretations that, from a European perspective, are hardly would pass the test of the moral right of integrity.

It is not about demanding a literal reproduction, totally incompatible question with cinematographic language, but to prevent the adaptation ends up being unrecognizable to those who know the original.

In these cases, the original work remains so profoundly altered that it would not be difficult to maintain the existence of a violation of said right. Precisely for this reason, the imprescriptibility of the right of integrity acquires an essential relevance, by allowing someone to continue watching over the creation even after its entry into the public domain. Otherwise, any work could be exploited without any limit, completely blurring the meaning that the author wanted to print.

Therefore, far from constituting a creative obstacle, the moral right of integrity acts as a legal compass that reminds us that adapting is not equivalent to appropriating. Artistic freedom thus finds a reasonable limit in the need to respect what made the literary work worthy of being adapted: its spirit. It is not about demanding a literal reproduction, totally incompatible question with cinematographic language, but to prevent the adaptation ends up being unrecognizable to those who know the original.

And perhaps it is precisely in the current context, marked by the growing tendency to reinterpret classic works to capture the increasingly "demanding" attention of the public and by a constant fear of inconvenience that, at times, seems to give more importance to avoiding controversies that preserve the essence of the stories, where the moral right of integrity acquires a renewed value. Not as an obstacle to creativity, but as a uncomfortable reminder about what You can't sacrifice everything that made a story memorable.

Eduardo del Río Dutú

Lawyer in Bardají & Honrado