Is a TV series plagiarism if it uses the same setting and themes as a book?

An author writes a book set in a specific, evocative location. Years later, a successful TV series appears that uses the same location and atmosphere. Does that violate copyrightNot necessarily. Copyright protects the concrete, original elaboration of a story (such as the plot), not the abstract ideas, themes, or locations. A judgement by the president of the Ghent Enterprise Court on 13 November 2025, concerning the popular series ‘Knokke Off’ confirms this fundamental principle.

The facts: the case of ‘Don't Silence Me’ vs. ‘Knokke Off’

The case was brought in summary proceedings by author Piet Baete against the production company DINGIE.

The plaintiff, Pete Baete, is the author of the crime novel ‘Verzwijg Mij Niet,’ (Don't silence me) published in 2011. This book is a thriller in which a chief inspector investigates a mysterious disappearance in Knokke.

The defendant, DINGIE, is the production company of the successful television series ‘Knokke Off’ (known internationally as ‘High Tides’). This series, launched in 2023, is a drama about the lives of a group of gifted young people in Knokke, their family conflicts, mental problems and decadent lifestyles.

The author argued that the ‘Knokke Off’ series was an unauthorized adaptation of his book. He pointed to the identical setting (elite Knokke), the atmosphere, and a list of 73 alleged similarities in characters and events. He demanded an immediate cessation of further exploitation of the series.

The court's decision

The President of the Ghent Enterprise Court dismissed the author's main claim in its entirety as unfounded.

The president applied the so-called “overall impression” test. Here the judge compared the fundamental characteristics of both works to see if they evoke the same image. The conclusion was clear:

• The book ‘Don't Silence Me’ is a classic ‘whodunit’ crime thriller. The central storyline is the police investigation of a murder.
• The series ‘Knokke Off’ is a drama. The central storyline is not a murder investigation, but focuses on the interpersonal relationships, generational conflicts and psychological problems of the young people.

The president ruled that the storylines are “incomparable.” The only significant common factor is the location (Knokke) and the accompanying clichés of wealth, decadence and partying.

Crucial was the president's consideration that this “Knokke background” and accompanying stereotypes belong to the “commons” (the public domain). It is a commonplace setting that cannot be monopolized via copyright.

The 73 cited similarities were described by the president as “far-fetched, detailed and contrived.” According to the president, they were general human themes (such as infidelity, addiction, elitist behavior) that often appear in literature and lack any originality.

Legal analysis and interpretation

This statement is a perfect illustration of one of the basic principles of copyright law: the idea-expression dichotomy.

Belgian copyright law, enshrined in Article XI.165 et seq. of the Code of Economic Law (CEL), does not protect the abstract idea, thought, method or style. It protects only the concrete and original form or expression in which that idea is cast.

• The idea (not protected): “A drama about rich, decadent youth in Knokke.”
• The expression (though protected): The specific, original plot of ‘Don't Silence Me’ (a detective investigates a murder of a young man after a garden party at the De Greve family, etc.).

Since the ‘Knokke Off’ series only shared the idea and setting, but had a totally different expression (storyline), there was no infringement.

One notable note: the rejected counterclaim

In turn, the production company DINGIE had counterclaimed for agonizing and reckless litigation, claiming damages and publication of the judgment.

This counterclaim was also dismissed by the president. The president stated that for a claim to be ‘reckless’ it must be brought lightly, which a reasonable person would not do. Although the author lost his case, it was not completely hopeless beforehand; it required an extensive defense by the opposing party.

The president also made an interesting separation between the media campaign the author conducted prior to the case and the lawsuit itself. The fact that someone seeks out the media does not automatically make the subsequent lawsuit agonizing or reckless.

What this specifically means

• For authors and screenwriters: You cannot claim a general concept, a theme (e.g., “love in wartime”) or a location (e.g., “decadent Knokke”). Your protection lies in your unique plot, the specific sequence of events, and the original interaction between your characters.
• For production houses and creators: You may take inspiration from existing works, as long as you do not adopt concrete, original story elements. Using the same setting or general theme is allowed, as long as you put your own, original spin on it. Documenting your own independent creative process can be crucial as a defense.
• For those considering a lawsuit: The threshold for “agonizing and reckless litigation” is high. You don't lose your case lightly. You really must have acted lightly or with malicious intent. However, this ruling also shows that both parties (plaintiff and defendant) can lose their claims (principal and counterclaim) entirely and each must bear their own costs.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

What is the legal difference between plagiarism and inspiration?
Legally, plagiarism (or an ‘unauthorized adaptation’) is the copying of the concrete, original elements of someone else's work, such as the specific storyline, structure or dialogue, creating the same overall impression. Inspiration is using general ideas, themes or a mood to create a new, stand-alone original work.

Are the characters in my book protected?
Yes, provided they are sufficiently original in elaboration. A general ‘type’ (e.g., “a gruff detective” or “a rich kid with a drug problem”) is not protected. But a character with a specific, original background, character traits, and a unique role in the plot does enjoy copyright protection.

What if ‘Knokke Off’ had used the murder plot from the book, but changed all the names?
That most likely would have been infringement. Copyright protects the core of the creation, being the original storyline (the ‘red thread’). Changing names or locations is insufficient to cover up an infringement if the fundamental plot has been illegally copied.

Conclusion

This ruling on ‘Knokke Off’ is a textbook example of the limits of copyright in Belgium. It confirms that atmosphere, themes and locations - however atmospheric - belong to the “commons” and may be freely used. The legal protection lies not in the idea, but in its unique, personal and original execution.