©-LAW

Physical address Can a rightholder request, under  Article 8(2)(a) of the Enforcement Directive , an online platform to provide personal contact details (more precisely: email addresses, telephone numbers, and IP addresses) of users of such platform who have infringed its copyrights? This, in a nutshell, is the question at the heart of the referral in  Constantin Film v YouTube , C-264/19 , currently pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). A few days ago, Advocate General (AG) Saugmandsgaard Øe issued his  Opinion , substantially answering in the negative (at least from an EU perspective). The referral is important for two key reasons ... plus one. First, because this is yet another case – recent instances being the 2019 Grand Chamber rulings in  Funke Medien ,  Spiegel Online , and  Pelham   [Katposts  here ,  here , and  here ]  – in which the CJEU will be required to balance differe...

The face of someone keen to share their Wi-Fi password .... What can be the nature of the penalties and measures to be taken in copyright infringement cases? More specifically:  Is it compatible with EU law to provide that the owner of an internet connection, through which copyright infringements have been committed, may escape liability thereof by indicating, without the need to provide any further details, a family member who has also had access to such connection? These were the issues at the centre of   Bastei Lübbe , C-149/17 , a reference for a preliminary ruling from Germany. Background The referral was made in the context of litigation between Bastei Lübbe, a German phonogram producer, and Michael Strotzer, the owner of an internet connection through which an infringement was committed in 2010.   The latter submitted that he had not committed the infringement himself and that his internet connection was sufficiently protected. He also argued...

Kat at the beach Right before the summer break, on 7 August last, when most people had already turned their out-of-office auto-reply on or were getting ready to move to the beach, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued quite an interesting ruling -  SNB-REACT , C-521/17  - concerning enforcement of IP rights under Article 4(c) of the  Enforcement Directive  and the availability and scope of the safe harbours under the  E-Commerce Directive . Background This referral from Estonia was made in the context of proceedings that a collecting society, SNB-REACT, had initiated against an individual, Deepak Mehta, concerning the latter's alleged liability for infringement of the IP rights of 10 trade mark owners.  According to SNB-REACT, Mehta had allegedly registered a number of IP addresses and internet domain names, which  unlawfully used signs identical to the trade marks owned by SNB-REACT members, together w...

Clearly looking at something very interesting While it is true that Member States retain significant freedom in devising relevant procedures for repressing copyright infringements and awarding damages,  Article 8 of the  InfoSoc Directive  requires  resulting sanctions and remedies be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. This provision is in line with what also Article 3 of the  Enforcement Directive  mandates. In this sense, the question that arises – and has actually arisen – is whether it is compatible with EU law to provide that the owner of an internet connection, through which copyright infringements have been committed, may escape liability thereof by indicating, without the need to provide any further details, a family member that has also had access to such connection. In a nutshell, this is the issue at stake in  Bastei Lübbe  C-149/17 , a reference for a preliminary ruling from the District Court Munich I (Ger...