Banner1.png
Banner3.png

CJEU - Opinion of AG Saugmandsgaard Øe in C‑264/19 - Constantin Film Verleih GmbH v. YouTube LLC and Google Inc.

From GDPRhub
Revision as of 18:32, 6 April 2020 by MB (talk | contribs) (→‎Facts)
CJEU - C‑264/19
Cjeulogo.png
Court: CJEU
Jurisdiction: European Union
Relevant Law: Article 4(1) GDPR
Article 2(a) Directive 95/46
Article 8(2)a Directive 2004/48
Article 8(1) Directive 2004/48
Article 8(3) Directive 2004/48
§ 101 German Law on Copyright (Urheberrechtsgesetz)
Decided: OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL: 06.04.2020
Parties: Constantin Film Verleih GmbH
YouTube LLC
Google Inc.
Case Number/Name: C‑264/19
European Case Law Identifier: unknown
Reference from:
Language: 24 EU Languages
Original Source: AG Opinion
Initial Contributor: n/a

Advocate-General Saugmandsgaard Øe advised his opinion on the Bundesgerichtshof’s (Federal Court of Justice, Germany) request for preliminary ruling in a case on intellectual property infringements and the obligation of YouTube and Google to disclose certain information of users who uploaded films illegally on YouTube to the holder of the infringed rights.

Facts

The underlying dispute concerns the refusal of YouTube LLC (“YouTube”) and its parent company Google Inc. (“Google”), both established in the United States, to provide certain information with regard to users who have placed several films online in breach of Constantin Film Verleih’s exclusive exploitation rights. Between the June 2013 and September 2014, works Parker and Scary Movie 5 were posted online on the YouTube platform without Constantin Film Verleih’s consent. Constantin Film Verleih demanded that YouTube and Google provide it with

  • the user’s email address,
  • the user’s telephone number,
  • the IP address used by the user to upload the files at issue, together with the precise point in time at which such uploading took place, and
  • the IP address last used by the user to access his or her Google/YouTube account, together with the precise point in time at which that access took place

under Article 8(2)(a) Directive 2004/48.

The Landgericht Frankfurt am Main (Regional Court, Frankfurt am Main, Germany) rejected Constantin Film Verleih’s request that such information be provided. On appeal, the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main (Higher Regional Court, Frankfurt am Main, Germany) ordered YouTube and Google to provide the email addresses of the users concerned, rejecting Constantin Film Verleih’s request regarding the other information. After another appeal (on a point of law), the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice) referred the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:

"(1) Do the addresses of the producers, manufacturers, distributors, suppliers and other previous holders of the goods or services, as well as the intended wholesalers and retailers, mentioned in Article 8(2)(a) of Directive [2004/48] and covered, as appropriate, by the information referred to in Article 8(1) of [that] directive, also include

(a) the email addresses of service users and/or

(b) the telephone numbers of service users and/or

(c) the IP addresses used by service users to upload infringing files, together with the precise point in time at which such uploading took place?

(2) If the answer to Question 1(c) is in the affirmative:

Does the information to be provided under Article 8(2)(a) of Directive [2004/48] also cover the IP address that a user, who has previously uploaded infringing files, last used to access his or her Google/YouTube user account, together with the precise point in time at which access took place, irrespective of whether any infringement [of intellectual property rights] was committed when that account was last accessed?"

The opinion of the Advocate General

Lorem ipsum

The decision of the Court

To be completed once the CJEU has given its ruling.

Comment

Add your comment here!