In a potentially groundbreaking legal battle, one of Sweden's oldest glassmaking companies, Kosta Boda, is facing a landmark lawsuit over €1 million in royalties allegedly unpaid to the creator of its iconic "snowball" glass lantern.
This legal challenge tests an EU-wide "bestseller" right aimed at fortifying cultural creators against producers and publishers.
The "snowball" glass lantern, a staple of Swedish household design, features a cloudy hue and rustic texture, creating a warm ambience with a tealight inside. Despite selling over 15 million units globally, the sculptor Ann Wolff, credited as the inventor, hasn't received any compensation since the mid-1980s due to the time-limited contract she signed in the 1970s.
Wolff, now 86 and originally from Germany, began her collaboration with Kosta Boda in 1972. Her snowball design, resulting from a year of experimentation, earned her 2% in royalties for each sale. However, in June 1984, Kosta Boda informed her that her copyright had expired, adhering to the then-common practice for works of applied art in Sweden.
The legal dispute arose when Wolff, inspired by a change in Swedish copyright law in 2023, approached Kosta Boda for retrospective pay. She proposed using the unpaid royalties to establish a prize or fellowship for young female glassmaking artists, marking the 50th anniversary of her iconic design. Kosta Boda rejected the proposal and offered a lump-sum payment of 400,000 kronor (Approx. 33,28,550 INR) and 4% royalties on future sales, along with permission to produce variations in different colours.
Wolff declined the offer, insisting on a fair deal. Her lawyer estimates she could have earned between 10 to 15 million krona if she had continued to receive 2% royalties on the 15 million snowball lanterns sold.
The legal conflict hinges on a change in Sweden's copyright law in 2019, stemming from an EU directive allowing creators to seek compensation for unexpected bestsellers. However, the implementation varies across member states. Kosta Boda, in response, stated that Sweden's bestseller clause applies only to agreements made on or after January 1, 2003.
Wolff's lawyers argue that the bestseller clause reveals the unfairness of the 1972 agreement, as changes in Swedish copyright law since 1961 protect applied arts for 70 years after the author's death. The case could set a precedent in Sweden, where successful designers often lack the financial resources to challenge unfair contracts against major companies. As the legal snowball fight unfolds, the outcome may have implications for similar cases in the country's design industry.