TV formats and copyright: The Spanish Supreme Court confirms protection for Pasapalabra’s final round

TV formats and copyright: The Spanish Supreme Court confirms protection for Pasapalabra’s final round

Pasapalabra is one of Spain's best-known television quiz shows. Although it is based on the British format The Alphabet Game, Spanish viewers mostly associate the programme with its final round, El Rosco. In this round, contestants must answer questions based on definitions linked to the letters of the alphabet, which are displayed in a circle, within a limited time.

The case involved three main parties. MC&F Broadcasting Production and Distribution C.V. (MC&F) is a Dutch company that claims rights over El Rosco. Atresmedia Corporación de Medios de Comunicación S.A. (Atresmedia) is the Spanish media group that broadcasts Pasapalabra on Antena 3. ITV Studios Global Entertainment Limited (ITV) is the international distributor and licensor of the broader television format.

The story begins in the United Kingdom. In 1996, the quiz show The Alphabet Game was launched on BBC One, remaining on air until 1997. ITV later held the rights to the format. However, the original British programme did not feature the circular final round that would later become central to the Spanish dispute. This element appeared shortly afterwards. In 1998, two authors created a game called 21x100, which is considered to be the direct predecessor of El Rosco. Their rights were assigned to MC&F. That same year, MC&F licensed the format to an Italian production company, which adapted the British programme under licence from ITV and broadcast it in Italy as Passaparola, incorporating the circular final round.

In Spain, Pasapalabra began airing on Antena 3 in 2000 under licence from ITV’s predecessor. Between 2004 and 2005, MC&F objected to the unauthorised use of El Rosco. The programme stopped airing on Antena 3 in June 2006. The format was later brought back by Telecinco, which is part of the Mediaset group. Initially, the programme was produced by BocaBoca, who held the rights from ITV. Mediaset then obtained a direct licence from ITV and entered into an agreement with MC&F to include the 21x100 format. However, Mediaset eventually ended its agreement with ITV, citing certain clauses as abusive and questioning ITV’s ownership of the format.

This resulted in litigation between Mediaset and ITV concerning the rights to Pasapalabra. In 2019, the Spanish Supreme Court ruled that Mediaset had exploited the programme format without authorisation after its relationship with ITV broke down. However, MC&F was not involved in that case, which would later become important in the dispute over El Rosco. 

Following the conclusion of the Mediaset broadcasts, Atresmedia reintroduced Pasapalabra to Spanish television under licence from ITV. MC&F then argued that although the earlier litigation had concerned Mediaset and ITV, its own rights over El Rosco had not been resolved. In March 2020, MC&F filed a claim against Atresmedia and ITV, seeking, among other remedies, an end to the final round. The defendants argued that El Rosco was not a work that could be protected independently. They claimed that it was either part of the broader Pasapalabra format or a derivative element of the original British programme. At first instance, the court dismissed MC&F’s claim, questioning both MC&F’s ownership of El Rosco and whether it could be protected by copyright in its own right.

MC&F appealed. In 2022, the Barcelona Court of Appeal overturned the initial ruling. It stated that El Rosco was an original work, that MC&F owned the relevant rights and that Atresmedia’s use of the final round infringed these rights. The Court of Appeal ordered Atresmedia to stop broadcasting Pasapalabra with El Rosco and awarded compensation for moral damages.

The case (STS 2182/2026) then reached the Spanish Supreme Court. One of the key issues before the Court was the distinction between a mere idea and a protectable format. First, the court recalled that copyright does not protect general ideas, rules or concepts. However, it considered that El Rosco went beyond a mere idea. The format included a sufficiently developed and structured combination of elements, such as the rules of the game, the timing, the position of the contestants, the circular display of the alphabet and the visual colour changes indicating correct, incorrect or pending answers.

Furthermore, the Court applied the EU law concept of originality, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union. It emphasised that copyright protection does not require artistic quality or novelty in the sense used in patent law. What matters is whether the work reflects free and creative choices and has a distinctive character. In this case, the Court concluded that El Rosco was sufficiently distinctive from earlier alphabet-based game shows to qualify for copyright protection.

In addition, The Supreme Court rejected the argument that MC&F was bound by the earlier litigation between Mediaset and ITV. As MC&F was not involved in that case, the previous decision could not prevent it from asserting their own rights in later proceedings. The Court also considered whether MC&F had acted too late. Atresmedia and ITV argued that the format had been publicly exploited for years and that MC&F’s delay should result in their claims being dismissed. However, the Court disagreed, as MC&F had not been passive. It had sent several requests and taken steps to defend its rights over the years, including before Atresmedia resumed broadcasting Pasapalabra.

Regarding damages, the Supreme Court took a more balanced approach. It confirmed that Atresmedia was only liable for the damages from the time the decision of the Barcelona Court of Appeal was notified. Until then, Atresmedia could justify its belief that ITV was entitled to licence the format by referring to exceptional circumstances, including previous litigation between ITV and Mediaset. Therefore, prior to this point, the Court did not consider Atresmedia to have acted 'knowingly or with reasonable grounds to know' of the infringement, as defined in Article 13(1) of Directive 2004/48/EC. As a result, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and confirmed that El Rosco is an original, copyright-protected television format owned by MC&F.