France's top court puts Rodin 3D scans beyond freedom-of-information law

Overview

Updated 1 hour ago

France's highest administrative court has ruled that the Rodin Museum's 3D scans of Rodin's public-domain sculptures are part of the museum's inalienable collection, not documents the public can request. The ruling ends a nine-year push by art advocate Cosmo Wenman for the scans' release.

The decision reverses a December 2023 Paris court win and the opinion of the government's own FOI commission, both of which said the scans were administrative documents. By classifying the scans as legally indistinguishable from physical reproductions, the Conseil d'État put them beyond freedom-of-information law.

Why it matters

If 3D scans of public-domain art are a museum's inalienable collection, French citizens have no right to access their own cultural heritage in digital form.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

9 years

Length of the legal fight

Wenman first requested the Rodin scans in 2017; the Conseil d'État ruled in 2026.

€3,000

Costs Wenman was ordered to pay

The Conseil d'État ordered him to pay the museum after throwing out his appeal.

€1,500

Compensation awarded to Wenman

The Paris administrative court awarded this in December 2023; the museum ignored the order.

Rulings in Wenman's favor before reversal

The government's FOI commission, CADA, and the Paris court both sided with him.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

People Involved

Cosmo Wenman

Art advocate and lead plaintiff

Lost at the Conseil d'État; ordered to pay €3,000 in costs

Alexis Fitzjean Ó Cobhthaigh

Paris-based civil rights advocate and Wenman's lawyer

Represented the plaintiffs through the French courts

Organizations Involved

Rodin Museum

National museum

Won at the Conseil d'État; argues scans are part of its inalienable collection

Paris museum holding Auguste Rodin's estate and sculptures.

Conseil d'État

Highest administrative court

Ruled against Wenman

France's highest court for administrative justice.

CADA (Commission on Access to Administrative Documents)

Government FOI commission

Sided with Wenman; opinion later contradicted

The French government's expert body on freedom of information.

Administrative Tribunal of Paris

Court

Ruled in Wenman's favor in December 2023

The lower court that first heard the case.

Timeline

2017 October 2026

6 events Latest: 3 days ago

Tap a bar to jump to that date

October 2026
Wenman publishes account of the fight
Latest Statement

Wenman's essay 'Treachery in the Rodin Museum 3D scan verdict' goes up on Substack and is widely shared.
3 days ago
2026
Conseil d'État rules scans are collection
Legal

France's highest administrative court says the scans are part of the inalienable collection, not administrative documents. Wenman is ordered to pay €3,000.
2026
December 2023
Paris court orders scan release
Legal

Administrative Tribunal rules most scan formats are administrative documents, orders their release and awards €1,500. It excepts plaintext point-cloud files.
December 2023
Wenman appeals point-cloud exception
Legal

Wenman appeals the point-cloud carve-out to the Conseil d'État. The museum and ministry ignore the disclosure order rather than appeal it.
December 2023
2019
Coalition files suit in Paris
Legal

Wenman, Communia, Wikimédia France and La Quadrature du Net sue after the museum rejects FOI requests.
2019
2017
Wenman begins requesting Rodin's 3D scans
Legal

Art advocate Cosmo Wenman starts asking the Paris museum for scans of Rodin's public-domain sculptures. CADA later finds they must be disclosed.
2017

Scenarios

Wenman takes case to the European Court of Human Rights

Possible Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Legal observers and open-culture advocates following the case

With French avenues exhausted, Wenman could file an application with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, arguing that denial of access to publicly funded scans violates his rights. The court's case law on access to information is limited, so success is uncertain. The museum's failure to follow the lower court's order could also feature in any filing.

French law changes to cover 3D scans

Unlikely Resolves by End of 2028

Discussed by: Open-culture groups including Communia and Wikimédia France

The Conseil d'État decision creates a gap in French FOI law. Advocacy groups could push the legislature to amend the law to explicitly classify digitized collection records as administrative documents. A change would require a government or parliamentary initiative, which is unlikely in the near term.

Rodin Museum releases scans amid public pressure

Possible Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Open-culture advocates who note public pressure has moved museums before

The negative attention from Wenman's essay could push the museum to voluntarily release scans, following institutions that publish open 3D data. The museum's revenue from licensed reproductions makes voluntary release less likely, but a partial release of lower-resolution files is possible.

Historical Context

2 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

February 1999

Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel (1999)

A New York federal court ruled that exact photographic copies of two-dimensional public-domain artworks lack enough originality for copyright. Judge Lewis Kaplan found the images were essentially 'slavish copies' with no creative input.

Then

The Bridgeman Art Library could not claim copyright over its reproductions of public-domain paintings in the US.

Now

US law now treats faithful reproductions of public-domain works as free; museums cannot control them by copyright.

Why this matters now

The US freed reproductions; France's Conseil d'État placed them in the museum's inalienable collection. The two countries reached opposite conclusions on the same question.

July 2009

National Portrait Gallery vs Wikipedia (2009)

Wikipedia user Derrick Coetzee uploaded high-resolution scans of public-domain paintings from the London National Portrait Gallery's website. The gallery demanded he remove them, claiming copyright in the scans.

Then

The Wikimedia Foundation stood behind Coetzee; the gallery did not sue, and the images stayed online.

Now

The episode became a reference point for museum claims over digital surrogates of public-domain works.

Why this matters now

It shows the recurring pattern where museums claim control over scans of public-domain works. The Rodin case extends that claim from images to 3D data.