Our announcement regards The Decision dated 18 October, 2018 of The Court of Justice of The European Union (“Court of Justice”).
In this present case, Bastei Lübbe as a German publisher seeks, before the Landgericht München I (“Regional Court”), monetary compensation from Mr Michael Strotzer (“Mr. Strotzer”) because of an audio book in which it holds the copyright and related rights has shared in order to download, with an unlimited number of users of a peer-to-peer internet exchange via an internet connection owned by Mr Strotzer.
Mr Strotzer denies having himself infringed copyright and has stated that his parents who live in the same household also had access to that connection not by providing further details about the time and the way used by the parents. Yet, Regional Court held by having regard to the fundamental right to protection of family life that such a defence is sufficient to exclude the owner of the internet connection from liability under German Law.
In that context, Regional Court asks the Court of Justice to interpret the provisions of European Union Law (“EU Law”) on the protection of intellectual property rights and the Court of Justice answers that EU Law precludes national legislation as to the owner of an internet connection used for copyright infringements through filesharing cannot be exonerated from liability simply by naming a family member who might have had access to that connection by adding that a fair balance must be struck between the rights to the intellectual property and respect for private and family life.
In this regard, it was stated that if further information about family members proving the infringement and offenders cannot be provided, it would cause serious infringement of fundamental rights to an effective remedy and to intellectual property as enjoyed by the copyright holder.
The Court of Justice did pay regard that would not be the case if, for the purposes of preventing what was regarded as an unacceptable interference with family life, right holders had at their disposal another effective remedy, by which for example the owner of the internet connection could be held liable in tort.
In addition, the Court of Justice held that for the Regional Court to determine whether, if there are applicable national procedures or remedies which would allow the competent judicial authorities to order that information necessary for proving copyright infringement and who infringed it be provided.
You may reach the decision hereby.
If there is need of any other information about the article, please contact the below stated person.
|
Ersin Nazalı Managing Partner, Attorney, CPA enazali@nazali.av.tr |
Hatice Zümbül Director, Litigation and Dispute Resolution hzumbul@nazali.av.tr |