Blockchain as Copyright Proof: What the 2025 French Ruling and eIDAS 2.0 Mean for Creators
A French court has accepted blockchain anchoring as admissible evidence in a copyright dispute. Here is what the ruling means, how EU regulations are catching up, and what creators should do now.
A designer sends a mockup to a prospective client. Three months later, the design appears on the client's website: no credit, no contract, no payment. The client claims the concept was developed in-house. How do you prove who created what, and when?
This kind of dispute is not new. What is new: in March 2025, a French court accepted blockchain anchoring as admissible evidence of prior creation in a copyright case. And upcoming EU regulation is about to give this approach significantly more legal weight.
Timeline: three dates that matter
| Date | Event | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| February 20, 2024 | French Decree No. 2024-139 on electronic timestamping | Clarifies conditions under which electronic timestamps qualify as preliminary evidence of prior existence under French law |
| March 20, 2025 | Ruling by the Tribunal judiciaire de Marseille | First explicit acceptance of blockchain anchoring as evidence in a French copyright dispute |
| December 2026 | eIDAS 2.0 Qualified Electronic Ledgers take effect | Distributed ledgers operated by qualified trust providers will carry a presumption of integrity across all 27 EU member states |
In France and most EU countries, copyright arises automatically upon creation, with no registration requirement. But when a dispute occurs, the creator must prove they had the work first. That is where technical proof becomes critical.
The Marseille ruling: what it says (and what it does not)
On March 20, 2025, the Tribunal judiciaire de Marseille ruled in a dispute between a content creator and a party that had reproduced the creator's work without authorization. The creator had anchored their files on a blockchain before the contested publication.
What the court accepted:
- The blockchain anchoring was a credible element of proof that the file existed on a specific date.
- The hash of the original file matched the one recorded on the blockchain, demonstrating that the document had not been altered.
- Combined with other evidence (communications, metadata, workflow documentation), it formed a sufficient body of evidence.
What the court did not say:
- That blockchain alone constitutes irrefutable or sufficient proof.
- That all blockchain anchoring methods carry equal weight (the quality of the process matters).
- That this ruling is binding on other courts.
This is a first-instance judgment, not an appellate or supreme court decision. Its legal weight is real but limited. It is a strong signal, not a rule that other courts must follow.
The February 2024 decree: groundwork already laid
The Marseille ruling did not come out of nowhere. French Decree No. 2024-139 (February 20, 2024) had prepared the ground by specifying when and how electronic timestamping can serve as preliminary evidence of prior existence.
In practice, the decree:
- Recognizes electronic timestamping as a means of evidence, as part of transposing the eIDAS regulation into French law.
- Distinguishes between simple timestamping (admissible but rebuttable) and qualified timestamping (which carries a presumption of date accuracy).
- Opens the door to blockchain-based anchoring mechanisms, without naming them explicitly, provided they meet integrity and traceability requirements.
The Marseille court relied on this framework when admitting blockchain anchoring as evidence.
eIDAS 2.0 and Qualified Electronic Ledgers: what arrives in December 2026
The revised eIDAS regulation (eIDAS 2.0) introduces a new trust service category: Qualified Electronic Ledgers.
What this means
- A qualified trust service provider will be able to operate a distributed ledger (blockchain or similar technology) recognized across all 27 EU member states.
- Entries in such a ledger will benefit from a presumption of data integrity and date accuracy.
- This presumption is rebuttable (it can be challenged), but it shifts the burden of proof: the party contesting the data must demonstrate it is inaccurate.
Why this matters beyond France
The Marseille ruling is a French decision. eIDAS 2.0, by contrast, is an EU-wide regulation. Once Qualified Electronic Ledgers are operational:
- A timestamp anchored via a qualified ledger in France will carry the same legal presumption in Germany, Spain, Italy, or any other member state.
- Cross-border copyright disputes, which are increasingly common in digital work, will benefit from a shared evidentiary framework.
- Creators and businesses will no longer need to navigate 27 different national approaches to blockchain evidence.
From the 2024 decree to the 2025 ruling to eIDAS 2.0 Qualified Electronic Ledgers: each step strengthens the legal value of digital proof of prior creation. The direction is consistent, even if the full framework is not yet in place.
Limitations to keep in mind
Blockchain is a useful tool, not a silver bullet. Key nuances:
- Blockchain proves a file existed at a date, not who created it. You still need to demonstrate the link between yourself and the file (creative process, drafts, communications, metadata).
- Process quality matters. A hash anchored without preserving the original file is useless. An anchoring without workflow documentation is fragile.
- Not all blockchains are equal in terms of durability and independent verifiability. An anchoring on Bitcoin via OpenTimestamps can be verified by anyone; a proprietary closed ledger, less so.
- Blockchain evidence works best as part of a package. The more elements you combine (timestamping, source files, communications, version history), the stronger your case.
What you can do now
You do not need to wait for eIDAS 2.0. The current legal framework already supports building strong evidence.
1. Timestamp your creations before sharing
Compute the hash (SHA-256) of your finalized files and anchor it on a public blockchain. Do this before sending anything by email, Slack, Drive, or WeTransfer.
2. Keep the trifecta: file + hash + receipt
Your proof depends on the match between the original file, its fingerprint, and the anchoring receipt. If any of the three is missing, the proof loses its strength.
3. Document your creative process
Keep drafts, intermediate versions, and communications with collaborators. The Marseille court accepted blockchain anchoring in combination with other supporting elements.
4. Version your work
Each significant version (V1, V2, client version, final version) deserves its own timestamp. A single anchoring of the final version does not cover earlier stages.
LegalStamp computes the hash of your files, anchors them on the Bitcoin blockchain via OpenTimestamps, and provides a verifiable receipt. The process takes seconds and produces evidence you can use if a dispute arises.
