Telecinco v YouTube: a Spanish landmark?

Readers may by now be well aware of the decision of a Madrid court to dismiss copyright infringement claims brought against YouTube by Spanish television broadcaster Gestevision Telecinco SA. This decision is welcomed by YouTube's owner, Google, which is currently involved in similar copyright disputes in several European countries. According to the Wall Street Journal, Telecinco claimed that the posting of audiovisual content in which it owned copyright infringed its intellectual property rights, and that YouTube was liable when users uploaded copyright-infringing material. The court rejected those claims in a statement.  Telecinco has already said it would appeal.  Google is confident that it will carry on winning in court:
"The court recognized that YouTube is merely a content-hosting platform and should not be made to pre-screen videos before they are uploaded",
the online mammoth said, adding that the result was a "clear victory" for the company, which also has ongoing copyright infringement litigation in Germany, France, Italy, and Belgium (it lost in Germany but is appealing).  Merpel notes that the Guardian calls the decision a "landmark" ruling: she wishes people wouldn't use the word for first-instance decisions in disputes that go on appeal -- it's the final ruling that makes the landmark, since trial judges' decisions are often writ in water.

The IPKat's friend Carolina Pina (Garrigues Abogados), who coincidentally represented YouTube in the Spanish litigation, has kindly sent him a non-official English translation of the decision, which you can read here.

Spanish landmarks here and here ...
... but is this a Spanish landmark too?
Telecinco v YouTube: a Spanish landmark? Telecinco v YouTube: a Spanish landmark? Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, September 27, 2010 Rating: 5


  1. The link to the non-official English translation is not working.

  2. Anonymous: our apologies. This translation was hosted on Google Groups. When Google withdrew support for storing documents by Groups, the link ceased to function. I no longer have a copy of the translation myself and suggest you contact Carolina Pina.


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.