have to give YouTube the names and addresses of users, if these copyright-protected Videos to upload? The Federal Supreme court passed this decision to the European court of justice.
expand All
In dispute over the obligation to provide information of Video platforms such as YouTube in cases of illegal pirated copies has called the Federal court of justice the European court of justice. They asked the judges in Luxembourg to clarify the question of how to interpret the relevant EU Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights.
in it is of the “names and addresses” of the speech, the need to give more in the case of copyright infringement platforms such as YouTube to the right-holder. The ECJ will now clarify which information includes, especially, if there is no postal address and no clear name of the user. The Supreme court formulated explicitly the question of whether the duty to provide information the company urhebrrecht violations the administration of E-Mail addresses, phone numbers, and IP includes the addresses. Until the decision of the EU judges of the Federal court of justice suspended the ongoing proceedings.
dispute over user data
In this specific case, had requested the Constantin Film AG YouTube information on three users who had uploaded of 2013 and 2014 movies “Scary Movie 5” and “Parker” in full length on the platform. By this time there were the movies in the cinemas.
Constantin Film AG had sued for the release of the users ‘ addresses.
The three users had not the right to distribute the films. YouTube deleted the relevant Videos later. The company fought back against the required release of names and addresses, and pointed out, to only have the E-Mail address, telephone number, and IP address of the Computer of the three users. This Information should be given to the Constantin Film AG, argued YouTube.
plaintiff, relying on copyright law
Constantin Film AG relied on the copyright act (UrhG). There is a right to information if copyright or other rights have been obviously violated. In the paragraph it States, inter alia: “The person has Committed the information to make (…) the name and address of the manufacturer”.
Youtube represented in the proceedings of the opinion that this provision had to be interpreted literally. It is thus only the (Plain) name and postal address. And because you do not have the one could give no information.
In the first instance, had lost to Constantin first, but then in the appeal before the higher regional court in a part of the success achieved: at Least the E-Mail address, should demand that the company is from YouTube.
Az: I ZR 153/17
