The cult children’s book character Conni has been an integral part of German children’s rooms for decades. But in recent weeks, the blonde girl in the red and white striped shirt has made it far beyond children’s rooms: the character from Carlsen Verlag has conquered the start pages on Instagram, TikTok and co. Suddenly, Conni can be found in every conceivable everyday situation: Conni on her first day at work, Conni at university or Conni commenting on social issues with sarcastic remarks.
What is just a funny trend for most social media users raises an exciting question from a legal perspective: To what extent are these memes actually allowed? And how far does copyright law extend when a protected cult figure becomes an internet phenomenon?
Carlsen Verlag takes a stand
The large number of Conni memes has not gone unnoticed by Carlsen Verlag. In a recently published FAQ, the publisher clarifies: The Conni character enjoys copyright, trademark and title protection. The publisher emphasizes that no permission was granted for these memes. It answered the question of whether it would take action against infringements with a clear “yes”.
After some social media users feared a wave of legal action from the publisher, the latter clarified its stance: the request for deletion will only be directed against memes that are inhumane, racist, glorify violence, are pornographic or are clearly commercial.
But where is the limit here: does copyright law not allow any leeway for memes?
Memes and copyright: current trend vs. decades-old law?
Whether a meme is permissible depends on an assessment of the individual case. In German copyright law, Section 51a UrhG (“Pastiche”) is decisive. Since its introduction, the standard has created leeway in copyright law: it allows the reproduction, distribution or public communication of a protected work if the use can be classified as pastiche.
But what exactly does “pastiche” mean? Basically, it means an artistic imitation, parody or stylistic imitation. Satire and irony are common design elements of pastiche. The Conni memes are likely to meet these requirements frequently: they present the children’s book character in new, exaggerated everyday situations and thus create a reference that no longer only appeals to children. A classic stylistic device of parody
For rights holders such as Carlsen Verlag, the trend is a double-edged sword: on the one hand, successful marketing – and completely free of charge. On the other hand, there is the danger that the children’s character will be misused. The publisher therefore makes it clear that only memes that place Conni in inhuman or sexually explicit contexts will not be tolerated. Commercial use is also not permitted without appropriate licensing. There will also be no possibility of invoking § 51a UrhG, as this would contradict the protective purpose.
What do individuals have to fear?
The question arises as to whether and how the publisher will actually enforce its rights. Comprehensive prosecution is almost impossible. Memes spread rapidly, are shared, downloaded and re-posted. Sharing a meme on an Instagram account is unlikely to result in a warning letter as long as none of the above-mentioned problematic content is present.
However, the situation may be different if accounts exploit a large reach and use the memes for advertising purposes. It is to be expected that the publisher will take legal action against this.
Conni memes in a legal balancing act – creative freedom meets copyright law
The meme trend shows how sensitive the relationship between copyright and internet culture can be. Memes on the internet thrive on taking well-known scenes, figures or images out of their original context and reinterpreting them. At the same time, creatives must be able to protect their interests.
The following therefore applies to users: just because it’s funny doesn’t mean it’s allowed. Anyone who creates and distributes memes should at least have a rough overview of copyright law. Although the pastiche can serve as justification for the creation and use of memes, there is no black or white here either. The boundaries are always fluid.
Carlsen Verlag and other rights holders must continue to face the challenge of finding a balance between enforcing intellectual property rights and remaining calm when dealing with Internet phenomena. In any case, mass warnings are not to be expected for the Conni memes as long as the trend remains within tolerable limits.
