[Article / Copyright] Appeal: IP High Court, Reiwa 4 (Ne) 10019; 1st inst.: Tokyo DC, Reiwa 2 (Wa) 24492, “Tweets pointing out tracing plagiarism” (Yoshinobu Hisamura, Patent, February 2024)

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む

Article information

Article type: Publication review

Display and classification checked: 2026-09-30

Categories: Copyright

Topics: Quotation / Moral rights

Published on this website: 2026-09-29

[Article / Copyright] Appeal: IP High Court, Reiwa 4 (Ne) 10019; first instance: Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 2 (Wa) 24492, “Tweets pointing out tracing plagiarism” (Yoshinobu Hisamura, Patent, February 2024)

(1) Reproduction and public-transmission rights (quotation defense)

The purpose of attaching images to critical tweets was criticism. Quoting Y’s illustrations to identify the subject of criticism was held to be within the extent justified by the quotation’s purpose and therefore a lawful quotation under Copyright Act Article 32(1).

Where multiple illustrations were attached, the first-instance court found infringement for lack of necessity; the appellate court recognized the legitimacy of the critical purpose and denied infringement.

(2) Right of integrity (unavoidable-modification defense)

Automatic cropping on Twitter timelines was found to be a modification deemed unavoidable under Article 20(2)(iv), and infringement of the right of integrity was denied for these reasons:

Timeline display is determined by Twitter’s specifications, not freely set by the poster; at posting, the poster cannot know how it will appear; changes to Twitter’s specifications may alter timeline display; and clicking the timeline image displays the entire image. In light of these circumstances, displaying only part of an image on the timeline constitutes a modification deemed unavoidable in using Twitter.

Relationship with Heisei 28 (Ne) 10101 (Retweet case)

The Retweet decision had affirmed infringement of the right of integrity.

The different outcomes are thought to be influenced by the different premise of whether the original act of tweeting itself constituted copyright infringement.

https://lnkd.in/gFXTP3TW

https://lnkd.in/gWux_hhy

知っておきたい最新著作権判決例（その3） — jpaa-patent.info

Originally posted on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7510496145211703296/

Related articles and decisions

Shared topic: Quotation — [Copyright] Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 14955

Shared topic: Moral rights — [Copyright] Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 70368

Shared topic: Moral rights — [Copyrighted works] Osaka District Court, Case No. 2023 (Wa) 9267

Updates and corrections

This log starts on 30 September 2026. Display and classification checks are distinct from a review of the legal analysis.

2026-09-30 — Presentation update: added the article type, this change log and a link to consultation options. The existing article text was preserved.

2026-10-01 | Name notation: replaced verified Japanese-script personal names with Roman-letter forms in this English article and its navigation. Legal analysis and original publication date unchanged.

Intellectual property enquiries

Contact Hideki Takaishi about legal advice or speaking engagements

Find the right consultation option

Images from the original AMEBLO article

English translations of the original image text

Original images retained for comparison

Original AMEBLO article

https://ameblo.jp/hideki-takaishi/entry-12973742083.html

October 28, 2026 — HT: Corrected verified names, case references, court labels, wording or judgment links where applicable. Existing commentary and materials have been retained.