CJEU: Pinckney Case Questions

As Kluwer Copyright blog already reported on the beginning of this month, French Cour de cassation filed several very interesting questions before the Court of Justice of EU in preliminary reference Pinckney C-170/12. UK IPO yesterday send to its subscribers this very helpful information, that also include complete version of the preliminary questions.
The applicant claims that certain songs he has composed and performed have been reproduced, without his authorization, on a CD pressed in Austria by the Austrian defendant company, kdg mediatech AG, and subsequently marketed by a British company on various internet websites which are accessible from the applicant’s place of domicile in Toulouse. The French courts claim that they have no jurisdiction to hear the claim.

The following questions are referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union:

1. Is Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December
2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters to be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of an alleged infringement of copyright committed by means of content placed online on a website,

(a) the person who considers that his rights have been infringed has the option of bringing an action to establish liability before the courts of each Member State in the territory of which content placed online is or has been accessible, in order to obtain compensation solely in respect of the damage suffered on the territory of the Member State before which the action is brought, or

(b) does that content also have to be, or to have been, directed at the public located in the territory of that Member State, or must some other clear connecting factor be present?

2. Is the answer to Question 1 the same if the alleged infringement of copyright results, not from the placing of dematerialised content online, but, as in the present case, from the online sale of a material carrier medium which reproduces that content?

Huťko is particularly interested in seeing how the CJEU will deal with his arguments from Wintersteiger C-523/10, especially those related to ‘the place giving rise to the damage’ (Handlungsort).

2 thoughts on “CJEU: Pinckney Case Questions

  1. Unknown

    ECJ decided, that the results of eDate do not apply in wintersteiger, because, the rights were diferently protected.
    It's probably going to make the same distinction here and lay a new set of rules how to interpret the questioned article.

  2. Huťko

    If interested I recommend this article in regard to copyright infringements online (though it does not concern the jurisdiction issues)

    Rita Matulionyte: The Law Applicable to Online Copyright Infringements int ALI and CLIP Proposals: A Rebalance of Interest Needed?

Leave A Comment