Preiskel & CoPreiskel & Co
Preiskel & Co
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Diversity, Social Responsibility, and Pro Bono
  • Services
    • Corporate
    • Commercial
    • Regulatory
    • Competition & Antitrust
    • Data Protection, Privacy, and Retention
    • Intellectual Property
    • Dispute Resolution
    • Employment
  • Sectors
    • Telecommunications
    • IT, Technology, & Internet
    • Media and Broadcasting
    • Websites, Blogging, & Social Media
    • Film & Television
    • Gambling & Online Gaming
    • Leisure & Retail
    • Energy & Minerals
    • Cryptocurrency & Blockchain
    • Creative Industries
  • People
    • Daniel Preiskel
    • Ronnie Preiskel
    • Tim Cowen
    • Jose Saras
    • Robert Dougans
    • Tina Cowen
    • D A T Green
    • Karthyaeni Vittala
    • Richard Stewart
    • Mor Swiel
    • Ilanit Appelfeld
    • Stephen Dnes
    • Daniel Oakland
    • Robert Harvey
    • Martina Raciti
    • Joanna Coombs-Huang
    • Xavier Prida
    • Mark Clough
    • Stewart White
    • Alison MacFarlane
    • Hannah Leader
    • Peter Dally
    • Antony Corel
    • Sue Warwick
    • Tony Curzon-Price
    • Shardi Shameli
    • Stephen Hornsby
    • Ewelina Korgol
    • Maria Constantin
    • Sophia Yakhno
  • International
  • Blog
  • News
    • Publications
  • Contact
Menu back  

CJEU says that adverts could infringe distribution rights

May 14, 2015By Preiskel & Co

An important judgment on the interpretation of distribution rights was handed down on 13 May 2015 by the Court of Justice of the European Union.  The judgment ruled that copyright owners could  prevent an unauthorised trader to offer for sale or address a targeted advertisement of the original or a copy of a protected work, even if it is not established that the advert gave rise to the purchase of the protected work by an EU buyer.

The judgement was triggered by a preliminary ruling request from the German Bundesgerichtshof in an alleged infringement proceedings that saw two Italian companies contending their rights in relation to specific pieces of furniture designed by Marcel Breuer and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and protected by copyright in Germany.

The Fourth Chamber ruled that

Article 4(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that it allows a holder of an exclusive right to distribute a protected work to prevent an offer for sale or a targeted advertisement of the original or a copy of that work, even if it is not established that that advertisement gave rise to the purchase of the protected work by an EU buyer, in so far as that advertisement invites consumers of the Member State in which that work is protected by copyright to purchase it.

To convey its judgement the Court has interpreted the InfoSoc Directive in the light of the “making available” right enshrined in Art. 6(1) the WIPO Copyright Treaty and referred to previous case law, namely Blomqvist, Donner and Peek & Cloppenburg.

Case C-516/13 Dimensione Direct Sales Srl, Michele Labianca v Knoll International SpA [13 May 2015] is available here.

 

Latest Preiskel & Co blog posts
  • Important decision impacting how companies must provide personal data requested by data subjects under their access rights
    January 19, 2023
  • NIS 2 Directive – Enhanced Common Level Cybersecurity Across the EU
    January 12, 2023
  • Saving the WWW from the W3C
    December 20, 2022
  • Imminent US adequacy decision to be met by legal challenges from privacy advocates
    December 13, 2022
  • Preiskel & Co Client, Nadira Murray’s awards for film “Winners”
    December 13, 2022
  • Telecoms Security Framework (TSF) – Background and Requirements
    December 8, 2022
  • Updated EU Commission decision paves way for 5G on the road and in-flight connectivity innovation
    November 29, 2022
  • Controller Binding Corporate Rules – EDPB adopts new recommendations on the application for approval and the elements and principles of the Rules
    November 25, 2022
  • ICO reveals new transfer risk assessment tool
    November 25, 2022
  • Ofcom publishes new rules for telecoms providers to combat scam calls
    November 23, 2022
  • The Future Is Now: The Disruptive Power of AI and Its Legal Ramifications in The Metaverse
    November 9, 2022
  • CJEU clarifies the interpretation of purpose and storage limitation principles under the GDPR
    October 27, 2022

The Preiskel Blog

  • Important decision impacting how companies must provide personal data requested by data subjects under their access rights 19 Jan 2023
  • NIS 2 Directive – Enhanced Common Level Cybersecurity Across the EU 12 Jan 2023
  • Saving the WWW from the W3C 20 Dec 2022
  • Imminent US adequacy decision to be met by legal challenges from privacy advocates 13 Dec 2022

Preiskel news

  • Preiskel & Co’s corporate team advised IXAfrica regarding a highly significant technology infrastructure investment for East Africa
  • Preiskel & Co’s Technology M&A Global Practice Guide published by Chambers
  • Preiskel & Co Client, Nadira Murray’s awards for film “Winners”
  • Preiskel & Co ranked in Chambers for FinTech Legal, Data Protection and Cyber Security
Preiskel tweets
  • Important decision impacting how companies must provide personal data requested by data subjects under their access… https://t.co/J39PFCbg0I7 days ago
  • NIS 2 Directive – Enhanced Common Level Cybersecurity Across the EU. Find out more here: https://t.co/Or9NlgMfXT #CyberSecurity14 days ago
  • Preiskel & Co’s corporate team advised IXAfrica regarding a highly significant technology infrastructure investment… https://t.co/iAVpUxhttj17 days ago
Preiskel & Co LLP
4 King's Bench Walk,
Temple,
London
EC4Y 7DL
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7332 5640
Email: info@preiskel.com

Find us on:

TwitterLinkedinMail
© Preiskel & Co LLP 2023 | Site map | Legal notices | Cookie Policy | Privacy