“THE PIRATE BAY” CASE: THE COURT OF JUSTICE DECIDES THAT THE ADMINS OF A TORRENT FILE SHARING PLATFORM ARE ALSO LIABLE FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

23/06/2017

With judgment of 14 June 2017 in case C-610/15, the Court of Justice held that the making available on the Internet of content downloaded by users amounts to a “communication to the public”, an activity that requires the authorization of the copyright holder.

 

Stichting Brein is a Netherlands association that represents and protects the interests of copyright holders. This was a case in which the association sued before the Dutch courts requesting a blocking injunction against Ziggo and XS4ALL, access providers whose members for the most part use the online sharing platform “The Pirate Bay”. The injunction was asked so as to block the domain names and IP addresses of “The Pirate Bay”, with a view to avoiding that the services offered by the above mentioned providers could be used to infringe the copyright of entities or individuals whose interests Stichting Brein was required to protect. Stichting Brein succeeded at first instance, but saw its claims dismissed on appeal.

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands referred the case to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling and asked whether there is communication to the public, pursuant to art. 3, para. 1 of Directive 2001/29, on part of an Internet website administrator, where the website concerned does not have any protected works on it but instead is based on a system in which metadata related to protected works stored on users’ computers is categorized and indexed in such a way as to allow other users to find, upload and download the aforesaid protected works. In this judgment the Court of Justice held that the provision and management of an online sharing platform such as “The Pirate Bay” must be considered an act of communication to the public pursuant to directive 2001/29 and therefore may be allowed only with the prior authorization of the copyright holder.

The Court also held that the administrators of “The Pirate Bay” are not involved in a “mere provision” of physical equipment but instead carry out an essential role in the making available of protected works. Indeed, they act with full knowledge of the consequences of their behaviour, with the objective of providing access to the works and indexing and listing the “torrent files” that allow users to find the works and share them in a peer-to-peer exchange with and between other users. Moreover, communication of this sort concerns an indefinite number of potential recipients and extends to a significant number of people, as the administrators of “The Pirate Bay” themselves declared on the website.

Finally, the Court held that it was indisputable that the making available and the management of an online sharing platform, such as that of the main proceedings, were carried out with a view to profit, given that the aforesaid platform also produced considerable amounts of advertising revenue.


“THE PIRATE BAY” CASE: THE COURT OF JUSTICE DECIDES THAT THE ADMINS OF A TORRENT FILE SHARING PLATFORM ARE ALSO LIABLE FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

23/06/2017

With judgment of 14 June 2017 in case C-610/15, the Court of Justice held that the making available on the Internet of content downloaded by users amounts to a “communication to the public”, an activity that requires the authorization of the copyright holder.

 

Stichting Brein is a Netherlands association that represents and protects the interests of copyright holders. This was a case in which the association sued before the Dutch courts requesting a blocking injunction against Ziggo and XS4ALL, access providers whose members for the most part use the online sharing platform “The Pirate Bay”. The injunction was asked so as to block the domain names and IP addresses of “The Pirate Bay”, with a view to avoiding that the services offered by the above mentioned providers could be used to infringe the copyright of entities or individuals whose interests Stichting Brein was required to protect. Stichting Brein succeeded at first instance, but saw its claims dismissed on appeal.

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands referred the case to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling and asked whether there is communication to the public, pursuant to art. 3, para. 1 of Directive 2001/29, on part of an Internet website administrator, where the website concerned does not have any protected works on it but instead is based on a system in which metadata related to protected works stored on users’ computers is categorized and indexed in such a way as to allow other users to find, upload and download the aforesaid protected works. In this judgment the Court of Justice held that the provision and management of an online sharing platform such as “The Pirate Bay” must be considered an act of communication to the public pursuant to directive 2001/29 and therefore may be allowed only with the prior authorization of the copyright holder.

The Court also held that the administrators of “The Pirate Bay” are not involved in a “mere provision” of physical equipment but instead carry out an essential role in the making available of protected works. Indeed, they act with full knowledge of the consequences of their behaviour, with the objective of providing access to the works and indexing and listing the “torrent files” that allow users to find the works and share them in a peer-to-peer exchange with and between other users. Moreover, communication of this sort concerns an indefinite number of potential recipients and extends to a significant number of people, as the administrators of “The Pirate Bay” themselves declared on the website.

Finally, the Court held that it was indisputable that the making available and the management of an online sharing platform, such as that of the main proceedings, were carried out with a view to profit, given that the aforesaid platform also produced considerable amounts of advertising revenue.


“THE PIRATE BAY” CASE: THE COURT OF JUSTICE DECIDES THAT THE ADMINS OF A TORRENT FILE SHARING PLATFORM ARE ALSO LIABLE FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

23/06/2017

With judgment of 14 June 2017 in case C-610/15, the Court of Justice held that the making available on the Internet of content downloaded by users amounts to a “communication to the public”, an activity that requires the authorization of the copyright holder.

 

Stichting Brein is a Netherlands association that represents and protects the interests of copyright holders. This was a case in which the association sued before the Dutch courts requesting a blocking injunction against Ziggo and XS4ALL, access providers whose members for the most part use the online sharing platform “The Pirate Bay”. The injunction was asked so as to block the domain names and IP addresses of “The Pirate Bay”, with a view to avoiding that the services offered by the above mentioned providers could be used to infringe the copyright of entities or individuals whose interests Stichting Brein was required to protect. Stichting Brein succeeded at first instance, but saw its claims dismissed on appeal.

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands referred the case to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling and asked whether there is communication to the public, pursuant to art. 3, para. 1 of Directive 2001/29, on part of an Internet website administrator, where the website concerned does not have any protected works on it but instead is based on a system in which metadata related to protected works stored on users’ computers is categorized and indexed in such a way as to allow other users to find, upload and download the aforesaid protected works. In this judgment the Court of Justice held that the provision and management of an online sharing platform such as “The Pirate Bay” must be considered an act of communication to the public pursuant to directive 2001/29 and therefore may be allowed only with the prior authorization of the copyright holder.

The Court also held that the administrators of “The Pirate Bay” are not involved in a “mere provision” of physical equipment but instead carry out an essential role in the making available of protected works. Indeed, they act with full knowledge of the consequences of their behaviour, with the objective of providing access to the works and indexing and listing the “torrent files” that allow users to find the works and share them in a peer-to-peer exchange with and between other users. Moreover, communication of this sort concerns an indefinite number of potential recipients and extends to a significant number of people, as the administrators of “The Pirate Bay” themselves declared on the website.

Finally, the Court held that it was indisputable that the making available and the management of an online sharing platform, such as that of the main proceedings, were carried out with a view to profit, given that the aforesaid platform also produced considerable amounts of advertising revenue.


IL CASO “THE PIRATE BAY”: PER LA CORTE DI GIUSTIZIA ANCHE I GESTORI DELLA PIATTAFORMA DI CONDIVISIONE DI FILE TORRENT VIOLANO I DIRITTI D’AUTORE

23/06/2017

La Corte di Giustizia, con la sentenza pronunciata il 14 giugno scorso nella causa c-610/15, ha affermato che la messa a disposizione su Internet di contenuti caricati da utenti costituisce una forma di “comunicazione al pubblico”,  attività che deve essere autorizzata dai titolari dei diritti d’autore sulle opere.

 

La Stichting Brein, una fondazione dei Paesi Bassi che protegge gli interessi dei titolari del diritto d’autore, ha adito i giudici olandesi per far ingiungere alla Ziggo e alla XS4ALL, fornitori di accesso i cui abbonati utilizzano per la maggior parte la piattaforma di condivisione online “The Pirate Bay”, di bloccare i nomi di dominio e gli indirizzi IP di “The Pirate Bay” al fine di evitare che i servizi di questi fornitori possano essere usati per violare il diritto di autore dei soggetti di cui la Stichting Brein protegge gli interessi.

Le domande di Stichting Brein, accolte in primo grado, sono state tuttavia rigettate in appello.

La Corte Suprema dei Paesi Bassi ha quindi adito la Corte Europea al fine di chiedere se si configuri una comunicazione al pubblico, ai sensi dell’articolo 3, paragrafo 1, della direttiva 2001/29, ad opera del gestore di un sito Internet ove sul sito in parola non si trovino opere protette, ma esista un sistema con il quale vengono indicizzati e categorizzati per gli utenti metadati relativi ad opere protette disponibili sui loro computer, consentendo loro di reperire e caricare e scaricare le opere protette.

Nella recente sentenza la Corte statuisce che la fornitura e la gestione di una piattaforma di condivisione online, quale è “The Pirate Bay”, devono effettivamente essere considerate atti di comunicazione al pubblico ai sensi della direttiva 2001/29 e in quanto tali sono consentite solamente previa autorizzazione dei titolari dei diritti di autore.

La Corte ha anche affermato che gli amministratori di “The Pirate Bay” non realizzano una «mera fornitura» di attrezzature fisiche ma svolgono un ruolo imprescindibile nella messa a disposizione delle opere protette. Essi, di fatto, intervengono con piena cognizione delle conseguenze del proprio comportamento, al fine di dare accesso alle opere, indicizzando ed elencando i “file torrent” che consentono agli utenti di localizzare le opere e di condividerle nell’ambito di una rete tra utenti (peer-to-peer).

Tale comunicazione riguarda peraltro un numero indeterminato di destinatari potenziali e comprende un numero considerevole di persone, come anche dichiarato dagli stessi amministratori di “The Pirate Bay” sul proprio sito internet.

Infine, la Corte ha affermato che è incontestabile che la messa a disposizione e la gestione di una piattaforma di condivisione online, come quella di cui al procedimento principale, sono realizzate allo scopo di trarne profitto, dal momento che la piattaforma in questione genera considerevoli introiti pubblicitari.


SIMONA LAVAGNINI TO SPEAK AT A WEBINAR ORGANIZED BY MICROSOFT ON THE RISKS OF COUNTERFEIT SOFTWARE

20/06/2017

On June 27, at 11 a.m., Ms. Simona Lavagnini will speak at a webinar organized by Microsoft on the enhancement of the software assets of the company, the legal consequences of the sale and use of counterfeit software, and the ways to manage IT contracts and software licences.

 

Software has now become an important resource for all companies which often find themselves having to manage a certain number of IT contracts dealing with software development, outsourcing or use licenses. It is essential for companies to know about the features of such contracts, the risks connected to them and the best ways to control them with a view to optimizing use of resources and avoid incurring in negative consequences.

Ms. Simona Lavagnini, partner at LGV Avvocati, will provide a comprehensive view of rights over software, also dealing with the civil, criminal and administrative consequences connected to use of unlicensed software or non-compliant licences. She will examine the cases in which protection is provided by copyright law and the infringements and remedies available in the field of unfair competition and consumer protection law. Ms. Lavagnini will also give some important advice for identifying unauthentic software and avoiding the risks associated with use of such software.

Mr. Paolo Valcher of the Software Asset Management and Copyright Protection division and Mr. Marco Cattaneo, Product Marketing Manager Windows Commercial, both from Microsoft Italia, will also be speaking at the webinar.

Registration is available by filling out the form available at the following link: https://info.microsoft.com/WE-NOGEP-WBNR-FY17-06Jun-27-SoftwareFakeImparaariconoscerliedevitairischi-335046_01Registration-ForminBody.html.