Facebook SF Abogados Twitter SF Abogados Linkedin SF Abogados
ES | CA | EN | RUS |  中文
Facebook SF AbogadosTwitter SF AbogadosLinkedin SF Abogados

  

Tuesday, 25 September 2018 08:27

The Court of Justice of the EU has spoken in order to protect the “copyrights” through its ruling C-161/17

The European Union Court of Justice (hereinafter TJUE), establishes that to re- published a photograph on a web site, it is fundamental prior authorization from the author, despite the fact that the photos are already available on the internet and has free access and “barrier-free” for its download.

The TJUE, on August 7th, in its ruling C-161/17, aims to resolve the violation of copyrights about a case in Germany, ruling in favor of the intellectual property and copyright issues, under which, is an imperative condition, the previous authorization of any author, to be able to use and publish their photographs even when those photos are already on the internet. According to the above, the Directive 2001/29/EC states that authors of artistic works, enjoy exclusive rights to authorise or avoid the use of their works.

The current controversy, arises because of the recklessness of a student that downloaded a photograph for its own use at a presentation at the College. Subsequently, the school published on its website a photo where it appears the student mentioned together with the picture of the main autor, without its permission.

Faced with this situation, the author of the photograph filed the relevant legal action against the student´s College claiming the amount of 400 euros, by virtue of having attacked its intellectual property, due to the prohibition of publication of its artwork without prior authorization.

Among other issues, the arguments of the Court Ruling considered that the broadcast of a work protected by copyrights in a different Web Site of the one that was originally authorized, violates the authorship of the photographer and the power over its artwork.

In lthe same way, it's worth bearing in mind the distinction proposed by the TJUE, which differentiates between the works of free access & free use, such as those on which a person have the possibility of downloading an artwork without permission of the creator and, in the other hand, which ones that requires the necessary consent by the author for download and its subsequent use, respectively.

At last point, the judgement also differentiates the re-publication from the action of disseminating a "link" which leads to the photo posted on a website previously authorized by the creator, since this type of tools enable the effective functioning of the Internet.

Writings SF Lawyers