Editor's note: This case refers to "The right to communicate to the public" , Its broad concept is the first time that a state court has held a Svensson Introduced in the decision of the case, And after that GS MEDIA Case and sum Filmspeler well-formed. The purpose is to prevent without the consent of the right holder, A third party uses technology to provide or assist others in obtaining a protected work for profit. Let's look at the details!

[background]

The dispute involves the Netherlands "The Pirate Bay (The Pirate Bay) " File sharing platform (Hereinafter referred to as "TPB platform" ) , Users almost cover the world. TPB The platform allows users to use it BitTorrent System share file, The file for download is virtual divided into several fragments, Split download, Improve network transmission speed. Users who use the system to transfer files must first download specific software (Not by TPB Platform provision) , Used to create seed files. Use the software, Users can upload files to the platform, TPB The platform indexes uploaded files, Facilitate retrieval by other users, And use the aforementioned software to download the file fragment to the local computer. The defendant in this case is not TPB platform, But two services that provide Internet access: Ziggo and XS4ALL, The vast majority of users of both services are TPB Users of the platform. plaintiff——Netherlands copyright collective protection organization Stichting Brein——Ask the court to seal both defendants TPB Platform domain name and IP address. The court of first instance ruled in favor of the plaintiff's claim, It was rejected by the court of second instance. The case was then appealed to the Dutch Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided to suspend the proceedings, Appeal to the European Court of Justice (Court of Justices) To make a preliminary determination on the following questions: TPB Whether the behavior of the platform constitutes "Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonization of copyright and related rights in the information society (The first 2001/29/EC No) " (Hereinafter referred to as "European Union regulation 2001/29/EC Number instruction" ) The first 3. 1 prescribed "The act of communicating to the public (an act of communication to the public) " ?

[conclusion]

European Court of justice follows 2017 years 4 month 26 day Filmspeler A case (Case number: C-527/15) Conclusion of judgment, To determine whether it is constituted "The act of communicating to the public" , Each requirement needs to be analyzed separately. Filmspeler State in the case, The actor knows the relevant facts, Still providing access to the protected works to other users, composition "European Union regulation 2001/29/EC Number instruction" The first 3. 1 prescribed "The act of communicating to the public" . In this case, Although the files are uploaded by platform users, But platform operators are aware of the consequences, Still actively create, retrieve, and classify uploaded files. Platform operators implement the above behaviors to help other users query the corresponding files, To download or share with other users. Therefore, European court of justice ruling, In the process of public access to documents involved in the case, TPB The platform plays an essential role, The platform shall be recognized as constituting the above acts "The act of communicating to the public" .

[comment]

For the first time, the European Court of Justice Svensson case (Case number: C-466/12) Introduce into judgment, And after that GS MEDIA case (Case number: C-160/15) and Filmspeler case (Case number: C-527/15) perfect "The right to communicate to the public" Generalized concept of. obviously, The aim of the European Court of Justice is to prevent non-consent of the right holder, A third party uses technology to provide or assist others in obtaining a protected work for profit.

compile: Liu Dan, The source of Aisabri Legal Counsel: Esabaril (ELZABURU)