Sticking platforms like YouTube for copyright infringement of ir users? The Federal Supreme Court (BGH) should decide on this issue on Thursday. But judges in Karlsruhe want to first submit case to European Court of Justice. This should clarify various when adopting European law in advance.
Only n will BGH Inkarlsruhe decide wher DieGoogle subsidiary YouTube has to pay damages, WennDritte on its platform protected works of Künstlerneinstellen and thus violate ir copyright laws. Experience has shown that it takes one to two years for DerRechtsstreit to return to national courts.
The lawsuit was filed by Hamburg-based music producer Frank Peterson, because various works of soprano Sarah Brightman, who he represented, landed on video platform without copyright being acquired. Among or things, private concert recordings and songs from albums on portal were to be seen. YouTube argues that users are explicitly called upon to respect and obtain copyright and have no responsibility whatsoever.
The case has been going through courts for years: Hamburg District Court decided 2010 in three cases in favor of Peterson, but orwise dismissed lawsuit. The Hamburg Court of Appeals ruled that YouTube was not responsible for infringement of copyright, but as a "nuisance", i.e. as a contributor. The company was sentenced to default. The Federal Supreme Court should clarify fundamental question as to wher platform is genuinely responsible for violations of its users ' rights and which obligations and claims arise from it.New copyright on way
Since copyright law is standardized in EU, BGH has now passed decision on to ECJ. The judgment is made on basis of current law. It was not until Wednesday that EU Parliament had approved a draft for a new copyright law that would oblige platforms such as YouTube to review content of ir users for copyright infringement. But that should not matter.Date Of Update: 14 September 2018, 12:00