|Merpel is already waiting in front of her laptop|
As reported by The IPKat, last week Advocate General (AG) Saugmandsgaard Øe issued his much-awaited Opinion in Joined Cases C-682/18 and C-683/18, advising the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule that:
- Platforms like YouTube and Uploaded (the latter is a cyberlocker) do not perform acts of communication to the public under Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive;
- The hosting safe harbour in Article 14 of the E-commerce Directive is in principle available to these platforms;
- Article 14(1)(a) of the E-commerce Directive must be interpreted as meaning that, in principle, the situations mentioned in that provision, namely the situation where a service provider has ‘actual knowledge of illegal activity or information’ and the situation where such a provider is ‘aware of facts or circumstances from which the illegal activity or information is apparent’, refer to specific illegal information;
- Article 8(3) of the InfoSoc Directive must be interpreted as precluding rightholders from being able to apply for an injunction against a provider whose service that consists of the storage of information provided by a user is used by third parties to infringe a copyright or related right only if such an infringement has taken place again after notification of a clear infringement has been provided;
- Article 17 of the DSM Directive is 'new' law and not a clarification of the law as it existed prior to the adoption of that directive.
The IPKat, in collaboration with BLACA, is hosting a live webinar TODAY at 15:00 UK time to discuss the content of the Opinion and the potential implications of the forthcoming CJEU judgment.
You can still join the discussion! If you are interested, just register here.
REMINDER: Today's Joint IPKat/BLACA live webinar on AG Opinion in YouTube/Cyando Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati on Thursday, July 23, 2020 Rating: