Out-Law News 2 min. read
08 Oct 2013, 9:16 am
Rights holders can bring infringement claims before courts in the country in which they are based in cases where the alleged infringers are based elsewhere in the EU and the alleged infringing products are sold online from another EU country under certain conditions even if the sale is not strictly 'directed to' the rights holders country, the EU's top court said in a provisional ruling it has made in a case referred to it from a court in France.
National courts within the EU have jurisdiction to hear such cases so long as the copyright for the works concerned applies in that country and so long as the infringing goods, sold from another EU member state, are "accessible" via the internet from within that country, the CJEU said.
However, the national courts in such circumstances would only be permitted to determine compensation for infringement based on "the damage caused in the Member State within which it is situated", it ruled.
The CJEU offered its provisional ruling in a case referred to it by the Court of Cassation in France. That court had been asked by French-based author, composer and performer Peter Pinckney to hold Austrian company KDG Mediatech AG (Mediatech) liable for infringing his copyrights.
Pinckney has claimed that Mediatech infringed his rights by pressing CDs featuring songs he owns the rights for without his permission. The CDs were subsequently marketed online by companies based in the UK.
Mediatech has challenged the French courts' jurisdiction to rule on the issue. It has claimed that because the CDs had been pressed in Austria and because they had been marketed from the UK that only courts in those countries could legitimately hear the case against it.
The EU's Brussels Regulation determines which courts have jurisdiction to hear and decide cases between EU citizens. Generally, those being sued have the right to have the cases heard in courts in their home country. However, there are many instances in which that general rule does not apply.
According to one provision, those being sued may face court proceedings in the country "where the harmful event occurred or may occur" if the matters at hand relate to "tort, delict or quasi-delict". This provision can relate to matters including where a wrongful act entitling others to damages is alleged or if an unlawful and either intentional or negligent harm is alleged.
Under certain conditions, copyright owners can bring legal claims for infringement before an EU national court where "damage has occurred" even if the "place of the event giving rise to the damage" is a different place within the EU, the CJEU said.
"As regards the alleged infringement of a copyright, jurisdiction to hear an action in tort, delict or quasi-delict is already established in favour of the court seised if the Member State in which that court is situated protects the copyrights relied on by the plaintiff and that the harmful event alleged may occur within the jurisdiction of the court seised," the CJEU said in its ruling. "In circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings that likelihood arises, in particular, from the possibility of obtaining a reproduction of the work to which the rights relied on by the defendant pertain from an internet site accessible within the jurisdiction of the court seised."
"However, if the protection granted by the Member State of the place of the court seised is applicable only in that Member State, the court seised only has jurisdiction to determine the damage caused within the Member State in which it is situated," it said,
"If that court also had jurisdiction to adjudicate on the damage caused in other Member States, it would substitute itself for the courts of those States even though, in principle, in the light of [the Brussels] Regulation and the principle of territoriality, the latter have jurisdiction to determine, first, the damage caused in their respective Member States and are best placed to ascertain whether the copyrights protected by the Member State concerned have been infringed and, second, to determine the nature of the harm caused," the CJEU added.
