Technological developments have influenced the way works are distributed. Given that most of these are made publicly available online, it is much easier to commit cross-border infringements. If such infringements occur, the question that may arise is which court will have jurisdiction to hear the dispute. In cross-border cases that do not extend beyond the territory of the European Union, Council Regulation (EC) No. 1215/2012 of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (so-called Brussels I) will apply. According to the above regulation, in both contractual and non-contractual cases (infringements), general jurisdiction is determined by the defendant's domicile or registered office (Article 4). In the case of copyright infringements, the rightholder may, instead of general jurisdiction, avail himself of special (alternative) jurisdiction. Pursuant to Article 7 point 2 of the Brussels I Regulation, in matters relating to tort or delict (e.g. copyright infringement), a person domiciled in the territory of a Member State may be sued in another Member State in the courts of the place where the harmful event occurred or may occur, the so-called forum delicti commissi . ( A. Michalak (ed.), Act on Copyright and Related Rights. Commentary, Warsaw 2019).
According to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 3 October 2013, file reference C-170/12: "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 must be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of an infringement of copyright protected by the Member State of the court seised, that court has jurisdiction to hear an action for damages brought by the author of a work against a company established in another Member State which, in that State, reproduced that work on a tangible medium which was then distributed by companies established in a third Member State via a website also accessible within the territorial jurisdiction of the court seised. That court has jurisdiction only for damage caused in the territory of the Member State to which it belongs."
As the above indicates, if a given work is available in every Member State, the rightholder will be able to pursue their rights in each of those countries. The only obstacle to pursuing a claim in any Member State is the objective lack of access to the work in that country.
This solution is certainly beneficial for copyright holders. Individual authors, in particular, can avoid the significantly increased costs associated with pursuing claims abroad by filing a claim with the court of their place of residence.
This alert is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
author:
