3 June 2017Jurisdiction reportsJens Künzel

Who’s using your internet?

Uploading films and music to file-sharing networks is an infringement of copyright pertaining to those films and music, and rights owners still vigorously pursue claims against people who they believe have committed infringement.

In many lawsuits, the only proof against the defendants which the copyright owner is able to obtain is the IP address. It is established case law in Germany that the courts may presume that the owner of the IP address was the person who committed the infringing acts if they were the sole user of the IP address in question. If the defendant does not present any facts that would contradict this presumption, the court can presume that the defendant committed the infringing act.

However, if the defendant substantiates that other users had access to the internet from their IP address, the plaintiff has the burden of proof that the defendant committed the infringing acts. For instance, the defendant may contend that a family member such as a spouse or child living at home, or third parties such as friends or wider family, had access to the internet.

In a case that was decided by Germany’s Federal Court of Justice in October 2016, the defendant was the sole owner of an IP address through which the film “Resident Evil: Afterlife” had undisputedly been uploaded to a file-sharing network 14 times.

The defendant disclosed in the litigation that his wife had access to the internet via his IP address and usually used it without his supervision. The Court of Appeal had dismissed the action on the grounds that the defendant had met his procedural duty to disclose whether third parties had access to his internet address by naming his wife.

Defendant’s duty

The plaintiff filed a request for further legal review with the Federal Court of Justice, arguing that the defendant’s duty had to go further than that.

According to the plaintiff, the defendant must provide further facts in connection with his spouse’s internet use, such as whether file-sharing software was on the computer, and the nature of his spouse’s internet use in the time period the infringements had been committed.

The Federal Court of Justice ruled that the defendant had met his procedural duty simply by disclosing his spouse as a third person who actually had access to the internet via his IP address. The defendant was not under a procedural duty to research and disclose the actual infringer, but he must disclose any third person who may have had access to the internet through his IP address if he wants to avoid the court’s presumption that he is the infringer.

That duty does not include presenting facts about his spouse that would have been possible to obtain only by keeping books and regularly preparing a kind of documentation about his spouse’s behaviour on the internet. Article 6 of the German Constitution, which protects the institutions of marriage and family, demands in situations like this that a spouse is not under such a far-reaching duty to disclose private facts about their partner in order to defend against the assertion of claims for infringements the spouse may not have committed.

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk