Google Wins Legal Battle With German Publishers Over News Snippet Fees
The court battle signified the ongoing fight between internet service providers and publishers, who are seeking a share of the revenues earned from the distribution of their news products.
September 12, 2019 at 12:23 PM
3 minute read
Google has won a case against German newspaper and magazine publishers that had been demanding the U.S. company pay royalties for the use of excerpts in its search engine.
The EU's Court of Justice ruled on Thursday that a provision in German copyright law requiring Google to pay for excerpts appearing on its Google News service was invalid because the European Commission had not been notified of the regulation.
"A German provision prohibiting internet search engines from using newspaper or magazine snippets without the publisher's authorisation must be disregarded in the absence of its prior notification to the Commission," the court judgment said.
The publishers previously said they were demanding as much as one billion euros ($1.1 billion) in copyright fees from Google for their news snippets and other items the company published on the web.
German publishers are not alone in their quest to be compensated. Others, too, have been seeking a share of the revenues earned from the distribution of their news products on such services as Google News and YouTube.
The court ruled that the provision in Germany's "Leistungsschutzgesetz", introduced in 2013, which required Google to get permission from newspaper and magazine publishers, was a "technical regulation" under EU legislation on internet services. Therefore, the European Commission should have been notified, the court said.
The court found that because the provision was targeted at infringements by internet service providers, it fell under the scope of EU umbrella legislation.
The case, brought by German copyright management company VG Media, a consortium of about 200 publishers, marked the latest clash in the ongoing legal battle between publishers and Google over what the publishers see as the U.S. company's free use of their copyrighted content.
The Association of German Newspaper Publishers, the BDZV, said in a statement that the court's decision was "irritating" because six years had passed since the German law took effect and publishers and editors were "still waiting for Google and other digital platforms to pay for the use of publishers' content".
Since VG Media lodged its complaint, the EU has agreed to an overhaul of its copyright legislation. In April this year, the EU toughened its copyright rules, forcing Google to pay publishers for news snippets and Facebook to filter out protected content. The bloc's 28 members must implement those regulations in the next two years.
The BDZV called on the German government to implement the new EU copyright rules to bring certainty to the sector.
|Related Stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLawyers Among Those Convicted as Hong Kong High Court Sentences 45 Activists to Prison
South Africa Regulator’s Staffing Problems Leave High-Stakes M&A Deals in Limbo
4 minute readGerman Court Finds Facebook Must Pay Users for Data Breach, But Less Than Expected
Singapore Tycoon Loses Suit Against HSBC, Sentenced To Prison On Forgery Charges
Trending Stories
- 1'We’re Here to Empower People to Make Good Decisions': Why Compliance Chiefs Must Learn to Think Like a Businessperson
- 2People in the News—Nov. 19, 2024—Pond Lehocky, Duane Morris
- 3Court System's Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission Presents Annual Diversity Awards
- 4Commentary: James Madison, Meet Matt Gaetz
- 5The Narcissist’s Dilemma: Balancing Power and Inadequacy in Family Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250