Bittorent Loses Again: A Recent Lithuanian BitTorrent Case and What It Means for the Construction of the E-commerce Directive

This article first discusses a recent Lithuanian BitTorrent case, Linkomanija, with its shortcomings and perspectives. It then compares the outcomes of the Lithuanian case with recent court practice in Scandinavian countries (the Swedish Pirate Bay and Finnish Finreactor cases). Finally, it poses some questions as to whether BitTorrent sites should be qualified as hosting services under Article 14 of the EU E-commerce Directive (2000/31/EC) and whether the application of the limited liability standard, as developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union, would be reasonable for BitTorrent file-sharing services in general.

Internet Service Provider Liability - The Swiss Perspective

Switzerland does not have a concrete legal framework dealing with rights and obligations of ISPs; however, legal doctrine and practice apply similar principles as stated in the E-Commerce Directive of the EU. The liability of ISPs depends on the “closeness” to the content. Whereas in cases of solely transmitting services the risk of liability for illegal information is remote and the duty of ISPs is limited to a take-down, content, host and link providers (in cases of moder- ated newsgroups) can become liable if the information made available is not controlled.

Internet Service Providers Liability in Spain

The article focuses on the current situation of Spanish case law on ISP liability. It starts by presenting the more salient peculiarities of the Spanish transposition of the safe harbours laid down in the E-Commerce Directive. These peculiarities relate to the knowledge requirement of the hosting safe harbour, and to the safe harbour for information location tools. The article then provides an overview of the cases decided so far with regard to each of the safe harbours. Very few cases have dealt with the mere conduit and the caching safe harbours, though the latter was discussed in an interesting case involving Google’s cache. Most cases relate to hosting and linking safe harbours. With regard to hosting, the article focuses particularly on the two judgments handed down by the Supreme Court that hold an open interpretation of actual knowledge, an issue where courts had so far been split. Cases involving the linking safe harbour have mainly dealt with websites offering P2P download links. Accordingly, the article explores the legal actions brought against these sites, which for the moment have been unsuccessful. The new legislative initiative to fight against digital piracy – the Sustainable Economy Bill – is also analyzed. After the conclusion, the article provides an Annex listing the cases that have dealt with ISP liability in Spain since the safe harbours scheme was transposed into Spanish law.

Kontent i Pravo v. Masterhost Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, Judgment of 23 December 2008, Nr. 10962/08 Translation and Comment

This Judgment by the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation can be considered as a landmark ruling for Internet Service Provider’s (ISP) liability. The Court stipulates for the first time concise principles under which circumstances an ISP shall be exempt from liability for transmitting copyright infringing content. But due to the legislation on ISP liability in the Russian Federation it depends on the type of information which rules of liability apply to ISP. As far as a violation of intellectual property rights is claimed, the principles given now by the Supreme Arbitration Court are applicable, which basically follow the liability limitations of the so called EU E-Commerce Directive. But, furthermore, preventive measures that are provided in service provider contracts to suppress a violation through the use of services should be taken into account as well. On the other hand, as far as other information is concerned the limitations of the respective Information Law might be applicable which stipulates different liability requirements. This article gives a translation of the Supreme Arbitration Court’s decision as well as a comment on its key rulings with respect to the legal framework and on possible consequences for practice.

Liability for Copyright Infringements on the Internet: Host Providers (Content Providers) - The Geman Approach

Copyright infringements on the Internet affect all types of media which can be used online: films, computer games, audio books, music, software, etc. For example, according to German studies, 90% of all copyright violations affecting film works take place on the Internet. This storage space is made available to such infringers, as well as to others whose intentions are legal, by hosting providers. To what extent do hosting providers have a duty of care for their contribution to the copyright infringements of third parties, i.e. their users? What duties of care can be reasonably expected of hosting providers to prevent such infringements? These questions have been heavily debated in Germany, and German courts have developed extensive case law. This article seeks to examine these questions by assessing German jurisprudence against its EU law background.

Google face à la justice française et belge Nouvelles décisions en matière de droit d’auteur

Internet Service Providers’ liability for copyright infringement is a debated issue in France and Belgium, particularly with respect to intermediaries such as providers of hyperlinks and location tool services for which the e-commerce directive does not set explicitly any exemption from liability. Thus, the question arises among other things whether the safe harbour provisions provided for in respect of caching and hosting also could apply to search engines. French and Belgian Courts had recently to decide on this issue in several cases concerning Google’s complementary tools such as Google Videos, Google Images, Google Suggest and Google News. This article seeks to give a summary of and to assess this recent case law.

Welcome to the Jungle: The Liability of Internet Intermediaries for Privacy Violations in Europe

In Europe, roughly three regimes apply to the liability of Internet intermediaries for privacy violations conducted by users through their network. These are: the e-Commerce Directive, which, under certain conditions, excludes them from liability; the Data Protection Directive, which imposes a number of duties and responsibilities on providers processing personal data; and the freedom of expression, contained inter alia in the ECHR, which, under certain conditions, grants Internet providers several privileges and freedoms. Each doctrine has its own field of application, but they also have partial overlap. In practice, this creates legal inequality and uncertainty, especially with regard to providers that host online platforms and process User Generated Content.

L'encadrement juridique du traitement des données personnelles sur les sites de commerce en ligne

"Thèse en vue de l'obtention du grade de docteur en droit de l'Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II) et de docteur en droit de la faculté de droit de l'Université de Montréal en droit privé"

Rôle et travaux au sein de l’Union européenne et de l’Allemagne en matière de la protection des consommateurs en Commerce Électronique

Cet article délivre un bref aperçu de la nouvelle législation européenne et allemande relative au commerce électronique et à la protection des consommateurs. Il décrit le développement du commerce électronique, de la législation et de la jurisprudence au cours des dernières années. Une distinction est établie entre les niveaux européen et allemand. La nouvelle Directive sur le commerce électronique a été adoptée le 8 juin 2000 et doit être transposée dans la loi nationale avant le 17 janvier 2002. Elle sera décrite et succinctement analysée avant d’aborder la nouvelle loi allemande portant sur les contrats à distance qui vient d’être adoptée par le Parlement allemand pour transposer la Directive sur les contrats à distance de 1997. Le cadre juridique existant avant l’entrée en vigueur de la nouvelle loi sur les contrats à distance sera également exposée en tenant compte de la protection des consommateurs. Alors que l’Union européenne vient de créer une nouvelle Directive sur le commerce électronique, les États membres sont encore occupés à transformer celle de 1997 en loi nationale. En comparant la législation européenne et allemande, nous soulignerons donc le point faible de la législation européenne : le temps nécessaire pour établir un cadre juridique efficace et fonctionnel peut facilement atteindre plusieurs années. L’article s’achèvera sur une courte présentation du « powershopping » ou « community shopping », en passe de devenir un nouveau modèle pour le consommateur européen, qui a fait l’objet de décisions restrictives ces derniers temps.

Die Auswirkungen der E-Commerce-Regelungen der EU-Richtlinie über Verbraucherrechte auf das BGB

This article investigates the effect of the Consumer Rights Directive 2011/83/EU on the German BGB. Special emphasis is placed on e-com- merce-relevant legislation. The article is based on the argument that European law requires the German legislator, when it transposes Directives intended to create rights for individuals into the BGB, to do so inbest conformity with the BGB’s current system. It therefore browses through the BGB’s relevant norms and investigates how such a transposition may be achieved. It will conclude that such a transposition is possible, but that the German legislator should de- vote more time to investigate how such transposi- tion shall be acquired.

Permissibility of Non-Voluntary Collective Management of Copyright under EU Law – The Case of the French Law on Out-of-Commerce Books

The possibility of the EU member states to adapt copyright legislation to new circumstances and to address unforeseen issues is limited by the list of exceptions and restrictions of the InfoSoc Directive. In spite of this constraint, the EU copyright framework provides for a possibility of introduction of non-voluntary forms of collective rights management that can help to tackle some of the contemporary problems with remuneration and access. This article is an attempt to deepen the understanding of non-voluntary collective management and its possible use. First, it provides a detailed description of the French mechanism adopted for facilitating mass digitization and making out-of-commerce books available, which was implemented through a new form of collective management of copyright. Then, it examines the mechanism’s compatibility with the InfoSoc Directive through comparison with the extended collective licensing.