NEWS

Berlin Court of Appeal (KG) decides on the copyright permissibility of framing and the limit of Section 50 of the German Copyright Law (press privilege)

KG Berlin judgment of 18.09.2023 - 24 U 110/22 - Framing in the context of current events permissible under copyright law (“Lindner photo”)

 Contents

What does framing mean?

Framing is a web design technique in which the content of a website is divided into several areas or “frames”. In this frame, another website’s content can be displayed via a clickable link. It is therefore a method of presenting links or links to external websites within your own website.

Facts of the case

The plaintiff is a photo agency that held the rights of use to the photos showing the FDP politician Christian Lindner. The photos in dispute dealt with a violation by Christian Lindner of the coronavirus rules in force at the time. These photos were published without permission on X (formerly Twitter) by a third party. The defendant, a public television station, used the photos on its website by framing them. The rights holder considered this type of integration (framing) to be a copyright infringement and filed an action for injunctive relief.

Decision of the KG Berlin

The KG Berlin dismissed the action as the actions of the public television broadcaster were permitted by the statutory limit of Section 50 of the German Copyright Act (reporting on current events). According to the judges, the framing was necessary, appropriate and proportionate, as the reporting concerned the corona rules in force at the time and any violations by politicians. The balancing of interests showed that freedom of expression and freedom of the press (Art. 5 (I) 1 and 2 German Constitution (GG)) took precedence, so that the exclusive right of communication to the public protected by the plaintiff under Art. 14 I GG had to take a back seat.

To the point

The framing of the public broadcaster was permissible here under the so-called press privilege Section 50 of the German Copyright Act (reporting on daily events, so-called press privilege). However, the judgment of the KG does not provide a practicable or generally applicable solution for the framing of links. However, there is a ray of hope: With the new Copyright Service Provider Act (UrhDaG), links by public broadcasters to content on platform X could become largely unobjectionable, provided that they are considered non-commercial.

more News

Copyright

TikTok publishes films without authorisation – no release from liability according to the Act on the Copyright Liability of Online Content Sharing Service Providers (UrhDaG)

Delaying tactics in the negotiations with the copyright owner do not comply with the licence obligation under Section 4 UrhDaG (Act on the Copyright Liability of Online Content Sharing Service Providers).
Trademark Law

There is a likelihood of association between the figurative mark “Greenlyst” and the word mark “LYST”

The sign “Lyst” was copied identically in the trademark “Greenlyst”. This is not automatically sufficient to confirm a likelihood of confusion. In the present case “Lyst” could suceed against “Greenlyst”.
Trademark Law

The Independent characteristic position of the Opposition Mark “COCO” in the challenged trademark “HiCoco”

CHANEL partially prevails – The Federal Patent Court in Germany (BPatG) rules that “HiCoco” cannot be claimed for perfume in Class 3.

Karin Simon
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Susanne Graeser
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Uhlandstr. 2
80336 Munich
Germany

Phone +49 89 90 42 27 51-0
Fax +49 89 90 42 27 51-9

Karin Simon
Rechtsanwältin

Fachanwältin für
gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Susanne Graeser
Rechtsanwältin

Fachanwältin für
gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Uhlandstr. 2
D-80336 München

Tel. +49 89 90 42 27 51-0
Fax +49 89 90 42 27 51-9