Categories
Uncategorized

The Decisive Appeal: How a Young Music Artist Can Defend Their Copyright Before the Court of Appeal – Strategic Lessons from a Fictional Romanian Case

This article is for information only and does not constitute legal advice. Every real case must be analysed individually, based on its specific facts and documents, together with a lawyer qualified in copyright and civil procedure.

Imagine you are a young music artist. You were sued for copyright infringement, you went through a stressful trial, and the first-instance court (for example, a Tribunal) issued a judgment that partly goes against you: it finds that your song infringes another work, orders you to pay damages and to stop exploiting the track.

You feel misunderstood: you are convinced you created the track in good faith, you disagree with the expert report, and you believe the court misapplied Law no. 8/1996 on copyright and related rights and the rules of civil liability. You are told that you can file an appeal before the Court of Appeal – but what can really change at this stage? Is the appeal a new trial? What can your lawyer still do for you, and how should you prepare?

Using the fictional story of Alex, a young artist who decides to challenge an adverse copyright judgment, this guide answers a central practical question:

“What can a music artist realistically achieve in a copyright appeal before the Court of Appeal in Romania, and how should they prepare strategically for this decisive stage?”

We will follow Alex from the first-instance judgment to the appeal, explaining step by step how appeals work in Romanian civil proceedings, what deadlines and formalities matter, how evidence and expert reports can be handled on appeal, which strategies can increase your chances of a better outcome, and when it still makes sense to negotiate.

1. Alex’s fictional story: from first-instance disappointment to the idea of appeal

Alex is a fictional songwriter and performer. After some viral success with an independently produced track, he is sued by a record label that owns an older song. The label claims that Alex’s chorus substantially reproduces the melody and structure of their work, without authorisation. They file a civil action for copyright infringement, relying on Law no. 8/1996 and on the general rules of civil liability in the Civil Code.

The first-instance court (for example, a Tribunal with a civil section specialised in intellectual property) hears the case. The court appoints a music expert, examines contracts, streaming reports and correspondence, and finally issues a judgment that:

  • finds that Alex’s track infringes the claimant’s copyright;
  • orders Alex and his label to stop exploiting the track and to remove it from platforms;
  • awards damages to the claimant; and
  • orders Alex to pay part of the legal costs.

Alex feels the decision is unfair. He believes that the expert report overstated the similarities between the songs, that the court misunderstood what is actually protected as a musical work, and that it ignored parts of his evidence showing independent creation. He also thinks the damages are excessive compared to his real income from the track.

His lawyer explains that this is not necessarily the end of the story. Under the Romanian Code of Civil Procedure, most civil judgments can be challenged with an appeal, which allows a higher court (typically the Court of Appeal) to re-examine both the law and, to a significant extent, the facts. As a general rule, the appeal must be filed within 30 days from the communication of the judgment, unless a special law provides otherwise.

From here, Alex and his lawyer must decide: Is the appeal worthwhile, and if so, what exactly are they trying to change?

2. What the Court of Appeal actually does in a copyright dispute

In Romanian civil procedure, the appeal is usually the second level of jurisdiction. As a rule, civil disputes are heard in first instance by a court (judecătorie) or tribunal, and in appeal by the immediately higher court ( tribunal or Court of Appeal, depending on the case). Intellectual property disputes, including copyright infringement, are typically allocated to civil courts with specialised IP sections, and appeals are heard by the Court of Appeal that supervises the first-instance court.

The Court of Appeal does not simply check whether the first-instance court respected procedural rules; it has the power to:

  • review the legal reasoning – for example, whether Law no. 8/1996 was correctly interpreted regarding originality, protected elements and the scope of economic rights;
  • re-examine factual aspects within the limits of the appeal grounds – such as how evidence was assessed, what weight was given to the expert report, and whether relevant documents were ignored; and
  • modify or overturn the judgment, or send the case back to the first-instance court in some situations.

However, an appeal is not a completely fresh trial started from zero. The case file from the first instance is central, and the Court of Appeal will usually work within the framework of the claims and arguments already raised, plus the specific appeal grounds. New evidence or new arguments are limited by the procedural rules and must be justified.

In Alex’s fictional case, the Court of Appeal might be Bucharest Court of Appeal, if the first-instance court was Bucharest Tribunal and the dispute concerns copyright in musical works. This is consistent with how IP-related appeals (including trademark matters) are often escalated from Bucharest Tribunal to Bucharest Court of Appeal.

3. Deadlines and formalities: the “gate” to having your appeal heard

Before discussing strategy, Alex must clear a basic procedural hurdle: filing a valid appeal in time.

3.1. Time limit for appeal

The general time limit for appeal in Romanian civil proceedings is 30 days from the communication of the judgment, unless a special provision states otherwise. This is provided in Article 468 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Noul Cod de procedură civilă).

Key practical points for an artist like Alex:

  • The 30-day period typically starts from the date the written judgment is formally served on the parties (communication), not from the date the judgment was read in court.
  • If Alex received the judgment via post or electronic means, he and his lawyer must carefully note the date indicated in the proof of service – that is the reference date for the appeal deadline.
  • Filing the appeal one or two days late can lead to the appeal being dismissed as inadmissible, regardless of the merits.

3.2. Content of the appeal

The appeal must satisfy certain formal requirements under the Code of Civil Procedure. In simplified terms, an appeal typically includes:

  • identification of the parties and of the judgment being appealed (court, case number, date);
  • a clear statement that the party is filing an appeal;
  • grounds of appeal – concrete reasons why the judgment is considered unlawful or unfounded (errors of law, errors in assessment of evidence, procedural irregularities, etc.);
  • the remedies requested – for example, full dismissal of the claim, reduction of damages, or modification of certain findings; and
  • information on evidence proposed in appeal (such as a new expert report or additional documents), with justification.

If the appeal does not meet the legal formalities, the Court of Appeal can ask for corrections within a short time frame or, in extreme cases, can dismiss it as inadmissible. For Alex, this means his lawyer must be meticulous: the appeal is not the place for vague frustration, but for structured, legally reasoned criticism of the first-instance judgment.

4. Building the appeal strategy: identifying genuine errors of law and fact

In copyright disputes, emotions run high. Artists feel personally attacked; right holders feel that their work has been misappropriated. An appeal strategy must rise above that emotional layer and focus on specific, demonstrable errors made by the first-instance court.

4.1. Possible errors of law in a copyright case

In Alex’s case, the judgment might contain problems such as:

  • Misunderstanding what is protected under Law no. 8/1996. The court may have treated generic musical elements (standard chord progressions, common rhythmic patterns) as if they were protectable in themselves, without examining whether the earlier work is sufficiently original.
  • Incorrect allocation of the burden of proof. The claimant must prove the existence of copyright and infringement; the court may have implicitly shifted the burden onto Alex to prove independent creation, beyond what is reasonable.
  • Incorrect application of civil liability rules. Civil liability in infringement cases still requires an illicit act, damage, causal link and fault, as emphasised in legal doctrine and practice on copyright-related injunctions and damages.
  • Misapplication of damages principles. The court may have awarded damages without sufficient proof of the claimant’s loss or of the profits allegedly made by Alex, or may have double-counted certain heads of damage.

All these issues can be formulated as legal grounds of appeal, allowing the Court of Appeal to re-examine how the first-instance court interpreted and applied the law.

4.2. Possible errors in assessment of facts and evidence

Apart from pure legal errors, Alex’s appeal can target how the first-instance court evaluated the evidence. Typical issues include:

  • Over-reliance on a single expert report, without properly engaging with Alex’s criticisms or with alternative musicological opinions;
  • Ignoring key documents (such as DAW project files and dated demos) that support the argument of independent creation;
  • Misinterpreting witness statements from co-writers or producers; and
  • Failure to consider the context of how certain musical elements are used across genres (for example, standard trap hi-hat patterns or common pop progressions).

Appeal courts in Romania can, within the limits set by the Code of Civil Procedure, re-assess evidence and even order new evidence where necessary. Copyright infringement cases, as noted in specialist commentary, generally follow the same civil trial structure as other civil actions, with the possibility to re-examine both law and facts on appeal.

For Alex, the key is to have his lawyer express these issues in a coherent narrative: how exactly did the first-instance court misread or underuse the evidence, and why does that matter for the outcome?

5. Evidence on appeal: what is still possible and what is too late

One of the most misunderstood aspects of appeal is the question of new evidence. Artists often hope that appeal will allow them to “redo” the evidentiary phase with a completely fresh approach. In reality, the Code of Civil Procedure aims to encourage parties to present their case fully from the start, and restricts new evidence in appeal to certain justified situations.

5.1. Using and attacking the existing expert report

In Alex’s case, the first-instance court relied on a music expert report. On appeal, he can:

  • attack the report’s methodology and conclusions in his appeal grounds, highlighting contradictions or lack of clarity; and
  • ask the Court of Appeal to order a second expert report or a supplementary report, if he can show that the first one is seriously flawed or incomplete.

Court practice in IP-related cases shows that expert evidence plays a crucial role in evaluating similarity and damage, but experts are not infallible; courts can order additional or new expert analyses when justified.

5.2. Introducing new documentary evidence

Under the Code of Civil Procedure, new documents can sometimes be admitted on appeal if the party can justify why they could not be submitted earlier (for instance, if the party only obtained them later, or if they respond to elements that emerged during the first-instance trial). The appeal is not an invitation to deliberately hold back evidence; courts may reject documents that should have been presented earlier without good reason.

For Alex, this means he should already have provided DAW projects, dated demos, e-mails with collaborators and sample licences at first instance. But if his label only releases certain internal reports or licensing correspondence after the first-instance judgment, his lawyer can argue that these documents could not have been submitted before, and now are essential to correct the factual record.

5.3. Witnesses and re-hearing of testimony

Re-hearing witnesses on appeal is more restricted. The Court of Appeal may decide that there is no need to hear again witnesses who were already examined at first instance, unless there are strong reasons (such as major inconsistencies, new documents, or procedural irregularities in how testimony was taken).

Therefore, Alex’s team must build their appeal strategy primarily around documents, expert reports and legal reasoning, rather than expecting a full repeat of the witness phase.

6. Provisional measures during appeal: injunctions, suspension and the life of the disputed track

A very concrete concern for artists like Alex is: “While my appeal is pending, can I still keep the track online, or must I take it down?”

If the first-instance judgment orders Alex to stop exploiting the track (an injunction) and to pay damages, that judgment can, in some conditions, be declared temporarily enforceable. To avoid irreversible consequences while the appeal is pending, Alex’s lawyer may seek suspension of enforcement or other provisional measures.

Under Romanian law, courts can grant preliminary injunctions or provisional measures in IP conflicts when the right holder presents credible evidence of an actual or imminent infringement and shows that the infringement risk would cause hard-to-repair damage. Conversely, a defendant like Alex may seek suspension of enforcement if continuing execution before the appeal is decided would cause disproportionate harm.

In practice, the Court of Appeal may:

  • allow the first-instance injunction to stand, forcing Alex to keep the track offline during the entire appeal; or
  • grant a suspension of enforcement, under strict conditions, allowing the track to remain online temporarily, often against a security (bond) or under other conditions.

For Alex, this is a risk and a negotiation point: sometimes, the commercial and reputational damage caused by an immediate takedown may push him to seek a settlement, even if he believes in his legal position. On the other hand, the claimant may fear that a suspension during appeal will undermine the deterrent effect of the judgment and may therefore be more open to renegotiation.

7. Negotiation leverage at appeal stage: using risk to build better settlements

The appeal is not only a procedural step; it is also a strategic moment for settlement. After the first-instance judgment, both parties have more information about:

  • how a court views the similarity between the works;
  • how credible each side’s narrative looks in a formal setting; and
  • how much time, money and stress a full appeal (and possibly a further recourse) will involve.

For Alex, the filing of the appeal can be accompanied by a new negotiation effort, with a more realistic risk assessment on both sides:

  • If the first-instance judgment is weakly reasoned or clearly flawed in law, Alex’s bargaining position improves – he can propose a licence or co-author credit on terms that recognise the label’s concerns but reflect the realistic risks on appeal.
  • If the judgment is strong, but the label is worried about reputation or about the cost of enforcing a large damages award, both sides may agree on reduced damages and a more flexible exploitation framework (for example, allowing the track to remain online but with a revenue split and proper credits).

Appeal courts, while not mediators, often encourage parties to explore settlements. In many IP systems, including Romania’s, the structure of the trial and appeal stages gives parties multiple opportunities to reassess their positions in light of evolving information and costs.

8. What can really change on appeal? Possible outcomes for a copyright case

At the end of the appeal, the Court of Appeal can adopt several types of solutions, depending on how it assesses the case. In simplified form, potential outcomes include:

  • Dismissal of the appeal and confirmation of the judgment. The Court of Appeal agrees with the first-instance judgment and keeps it in force.
  • Admitting the appeal and changing the judgment. The Court of Appeal may:
    • fully reject the claimant’s action, if it finds no infringement;
    • partially admit the action, but reduce damages or refine the injunction (for example, allowing certain uses while prohibiting others); or
    • correct specific legal mistakes (for instance, regarding moral vs economic rights) while keeping parts of the judgment.
  • Quashing the judgment and sending the case back. In some situations – for example, serious procedural errors or insufficient factual findings – the Court of Appeal may quash the judgment and send the case back to the first-instance court for a new judgment, with instructions.

In Alex’s fictional story, possible positive outcomes on appeal include:

  • the Court of Appeal disagrees with the expert’s conclusion and finds no substantial similarity in protectable elements, dismissing the claim altogether;
  • the court maintains a finding of infringement, but substantially reduces damages and adjusts the injunction (for example, allowing certain non-commercial uses or future licensing); or
  • the court sends the case back for a new expert report and a more thorough factual evaluation.

Conversely, Alex must also accept the risk that the Court of Appeal could confirm the judgment or, in some scenarios, even clarify certain aspects in a way that is less favourable. That is why a careful risk-benefit analysis with his lawyer is essential before deciding to pursue appeal to the end.

9. What Alex’s experience teaches artists: preparing for a possible appeal from day one

Alex’s fictional journey to the Court of Appeal highlights a crucial lesson: appeal strategy starts long before the first-instance judgment. From the moment an artist starts releasing music, certain professional habits can make a future appeal – if needed – far more solid.

Practical lessons for artists and their teams:

  • Document the creative process in an organised way. Keep project files, dated demos, lyric drafts and correspondence with collaborators in structured folders. This material becomes your factual backbone if similarity is later disputed.
  • Use clear written contracts. For co-writes, production, publishing and label deals, ensure that contracts clarify shares, rights and responsibilities. Law no. 8/1996 expressly regulates the assignment of economic rights and allows limitations by territory, duration and type of right.
  • Register works with relevant organisations. Registration with collective management organisations – such as UCMR-ADA for authors of musical works or CREDIDAM for performers – helps identify right holders and facilitates royalty collection and evidence in disputes.
  • Seek specialised legal advice early. A short consultation when signing a key contract or when receiving a first infringement notice is often far cheaper than years of litigation.
  • Think litigation strategy when structuring your career. If you are a frequent collaborator or use many samples, establish internal rules (for example, always keeping licences and proof of lawful use) that will later support you in court if needed.

These habits do not guarantee that you will never find yourself before a Court of Appeal. But they significantly increase your chances of defending yourself effectively if you do.

10. Practical checklist: what to do if you are already preparing a copyright appeal

If you are in a situation similar to Alex’s and a first-instance judgment has already been issued against you, this checklist can help you organise your next steps:

  1. Note the appeal deadline. Check the date on which the written judgment was communicated to you. Calculate the 30-day period for filing the appeal and put the deadline in your calendar.
  2. Request the full case file from your lawyer. Carefully review the judgment, the expert report, the transcripts of hearings and the key documents.
  3. Identify concrete errors and priorities. Together with your lawyer, list in writing:
    • errors of law (misinterpretation of Law no. 8/1996 or civil liability rules);
    • errors of fact (misreading of evidence, ignoring certain documents); and
    • procedural issues (denial of relevant evidence, lack of reasoning).
  4. Decide what you want to achieve. Are you aiming for full dismissal of the claim, a reduction of damages, a more balanced injunction, or a remand for a new expert report?
  5. Gather any new, justified evidence. If important documents emerged only after the first-instance judgment, or if you can reasonably explain why you could not submit them earlier, discuss with your lawyer how to present them in appeal.
  6. Discuss provisional measures. If enforcing the first-instance judgment (for example, taking the track down) would cause serious harm, ask your lawyer whether a suspension of enforcement or other interim measures are realistically available in your case.
  7. Reassess the possibility of settlement. Use the information from the first-instance judgment and the appeal risk profile to consider whether a negotiated solution, licence or co-author credit might be preferable to prolonged litigation.

11. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) – Appeals in copyright disputes for music artists

What is the general time limit for filing an appeal in a Romanian copyright case?

In most civil cases, including copyright disputes, the general time limit for filing an appeal is 30 days from the communication of the written judgment, according to Article 468 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a special law provides otherwise. The key date is the one indicated in the proof of service of the judgment.

Is the appeal a completely new trial in a copyright infringement case?

No. The appeal is a re-examination of the case by a higher court (usually the Court of Appeal), which can review both legal and factual aspects within the limits of the appeal grounds. However, it is not a totally new trial started from zero: the case file from the first instance remains central, and new evidence is admitted only under specific conditions.

Can I bring new evidence on appeal in a copyright dispute?

New evidence can sometimes be submitted in appeal, but only if you can justify why it could not be presented earlier or if it replies to developments that occurred during the first-instance trial. The Code of Civil Procedure aims to discourage parties from holding back evidence, so unjustified late submission may be rejected. Discuss with your lawyer which documents truly qualify as new and necessary.

Can the Court of Appeal order a new music expert report?

Yes. If the appeal convincingly shows that the first expert report is incomplete, inconsistent or based on incorrect assumptions, the Court of Appeal can order a supplementary report or appoint a new expert. Expert evidence is often crucial in copyright disputes, so carefully formulated criticisms in the appeal are important.

While the appeal is pending, do I have to take my track down if the first-instance court ordered an injunction?

It depends. If the first-instance judgment is enforceable and orders you to stop exploiting the track, you may need to comply unless the Court of Appeal grants suspension of enforcement or another interim measure. Courts can issue or suspend injunctions in IP matters where credible evidence of infringement and irreparable harm is presented, but this is assessed case by case.

What can change at the appeal stage of a copyright case?

The Court of Appeal can confirm the first-instance judgment, modify it (for example, reducing damages, adjusting the injunction or even finding no infringement) or, in some situations, quash it and send the case back for a new judgment. The exact range of outcomes depends on the grounds of appeal and the errors identified by the court.

Do I really need a lawyer specialised in copyright for an appeal?

While the law does not always force you to use a specialised lawyer, in practice a copyright appeal is complex. It combines detailed legal rules under Law no. 8/1996, technical analysis of music and sophisticated civil procedure. A lawyer with experience in copyright and IP litigation is better placed to formulate strong appeal grounds, challenge expert reports and assess realistic strategies for settlement or continued litigation.

12. Conclusion: treating the appeal as a strategic second chance – not just a formality

Alex’s fictional story before the Court of Appeal shows that the appeal stage is neither a magical reset button nor a mere formality. It is a strategic second chance, tightly framed by deadlines, formal requirements and the existing evidentiary record.

For music artists facing copyright disputes, the key messages are:

  • Do not wait for the appeal to start thinking strategically. Build your legal and evidentiary discipline from the beginning of your career.
  • If you receive an adverse judgment, act quickly but calmly: note the appeal deadline, review the file thoroughly and structure your grounds of appeal around real, demonstrable errors.
  • Use the appeal as both a legal opportunity and a negotiation moment – sometimes, the best outcome is a settlement that protects your long-term artistic freedom and financial stability.
  • Work closely with a lawyer who understands both copyright law and the realities of the music industry, so that your artistic story and your legal arguments support each other.

Ultimately, the decisive appeal is not just about winning or losing one case. It is about learning how to integrate law into your creative life so that your music – and the rights attached to it – have the strongest possible protection when it matters most.

Sources and further reading