IEF 8881

De weergave van dit artikel is misschien niet optimaal, omdat deze is overgenomen uit onze oudere databank.

Copyright: FTD BV vs Eyeworks

The Hague District Court, Judgment in Preliminary Proceedings of 2 June 2010, KG ZA 10-639, FTD BV vs Eyeworks Film & TV Drama BV (translated judgement)

Copyright. Facilitating the downloading of copyrighted content is considered ‘making available to he public’. “Instead it is important whether the behavior of FTD allows users to download copyrighted files (in an easier manner) and that it thus makes such files in fact available to the public. This is the case, provisionally judging.”

2.1. The issue of this case is the downloading from Usenet of copyrighted material and the role played by FTD in this. (…)

2.6. FTD provides a service by which users can find and download files on Usenet in an easy way. To that end it gives access to a computer application, referred to hereinafter as FTD Application, by which users can share information about files stored in Usenet servers. In the FTD Application users post so-called spots, data regarding files which are considered interesting by users. A spot comprises the name under which the file in question can be found on Usenet.

4.3. The present preliminary proceedings concern the question whether by its behavior FTD makes the work available to the public.

4.4. FTD argues that it does not make available, because the copyrighted files are not within its power at any time. The servers in which the files are stored are not controlled by it, nor does it have any influence on the downloading by users, so it argues. Be that as it may, provisionally judging it is not relevant whether the copyrighted files are actually in the power of FTD at any time. Instead it is important whether the behavior of FTD allows users to download copyrighted files (in an easier manner) and that it thus makes such files in fact available to the public. This is the case, provisionally judging.

Read the translated judgment here. Original judgment here.