OLG Frankfurt a.M. 11U 115/13
The Regional Court of Appeal in Frankfurt had to decide on the value of a damage claim for illegal file sharing on the internet. The file was a music song in the charts which was illegally offered for download to an unlimited number of people on the internet. As there are no tariffs for files illegally shared the court mainly considered what tariff the infringer would have had to pay to the rights holder for a legal file sharing online of such a music song. It held that the amount of 200 Euros was market standard for retrieving a licence to share a music file on the internet.
On June 5th, the UK government launched a new industry-backed scheme which helps organisations to protect themselves against cyber attacks. If certification is obtained organisations gain a new Cyber Essentials badge which should assist them in demonstrating to third parties that they have taken the prescribed steps and are managing their exposure to cyber risks.
The UK government requires all suppliers bidding for certain sensitive and personal information handling contracts to be certified against Cyber Essentials scheme from October 2014.
European Court of Justice C-360/13
The European Court of Justice decided that the copies of internet sites created on the screen and in the cache of an end-user's computer, when the latter surfs the internet, are transient and an integral part of a technical process within the scope of Article 5 section 1 of EU directive 2001/29/EC. The creation of those copies therefore does not require the consent of the owner of the copyright in those websites.
European General Court T-286/09
The European General Court has confirmed the fine of 1.06bn Euro issued by the European Commission against Intel.
The court found that the American chip manufacturer Intel held a market share above 70% for computer chips. It would grant discounts to computer manufacturers Dell, Lenovo, HP and NEC on condition to buy almost all x86 processors from Intel. It also made payments to the retailer Media-Saturn on condition it would only sell computers that ran on Intel's x86 chips. Further Intel made payments to the manufacturers HP, Acer and Lenovo for them to market computers with AMD chips later, limited or not at all.
The judges held that with its dominant market share the granting of exclusive discounts by Intel to particular manufacturers was in itself a behaviour likely to restrict competition. A further proof by the European Commission of its actual damaging impact on the competition was therefore not required. The payments to the retailer and manufacturers for exclusivity are a similar restriction of competition only later in the sales chain.
European Court of Justice C-131/12
In a ruling which is already being commented as a landmark decision the European Court of Justice held that the search engine provider Google Spain has to delete certain links from its search result index if those links lead to information provided by third parties that is personal data the processing of which by the search engine at this point in time is not any more covered by the legal requirements of processing such personal data. Google search index still provided a link to newspaper reports from 16 years ago about the auctioning of property of an individual who was in debt. The debt was paid off.
According to data protection law the data controller, here the search engine provider, has to ensure that personal data are processed fairly and lawfully, collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes, not further processed in a way incompatible with those purposes, adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose for which they are collected or processed, accurate, kept up to date, kept in form which permits the identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected or processed. The controller must take every reasonable step to ensure that data which do not meet those requirements are erased or rectified.
The decision supports the individual's so called "right to forget" in the digital world. It also holds non EU companies, particularly US companies, liable under EU data protection law if they do business directly or through their entities in Europe.
The EU consumer rights directive EC 2011/83 dated 20.10.2011 becomes directly applicable national law from the 13th of June onwards. EU countries that implemented the directive by local acts must apply those laws by that date.In the UK the "Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013" comes into force. In Germany the "Gesetz zur Umsetzung der Verbraucherrechterichtlinie" dated 27/09/13 transposes the EU directive into German law.
The directive addresses business conducted between a trader and a consumer (b2c).
Most importantly the directive aims to eliminate hidden charges and costs on the internet, increase price transparency, ban pre-ticked boxes on websites, grant consumer 14 days to change his mind on a purchase, give better refund rights, introduce an EU wide model withdrawal form, eliminate surcharges for the use of credit cards and hotlines, provide clearer information on who pays for returning goods, provide better consumer protections in relation to digital products, set common rules for businesses to make it easier for them to trade all over Europe.
ECJ C-387/12
The European Court of Justice looked again at the issue of transnational copyright infringement. In the case of a photographer suing a French company for transferring the economic rights to a photo he took to another company in France which had a German entity.
The Court found that apart from the general jurisdiction of the place of harmful event, jurisdiction could also be established at the place where the damage occurred. Although that jurisdiction would be limited to determining the damage incurred in that country. Therefore the photographer could sue the French company for the damages he incurred by the German entity of the second French company exploiting his photographic work in Germany.
