EU's Top Court Sides With Google in Rebuffing Germany's Bid to Regulate Gmail
The ruling means that Google and similar service providers will be able to avoid the vast range of data protection and security obligations that apply to telecommunications companies in Germany.
June 13, 2019 at 04:45 PM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Google won an important and rare victory Thursday when the European Court of Justice ruled that its Gmail service should not be treated as a telecommunications service, dismissing arguments made by Germany's telecoms regulator.
The ruling means that Google will not be required to register Gmail as a telecoms service and will escape the vast range of data protection and security obligations that apply to telecommunications companies in Germany.
The decision is a victory for Google and other so-called over-the-top (OTT) service providers that feared the burden of being treated the same way as telecommunications companies.
In 2015, Google challenged a decision by Germany's telecoms regulator, the Bundesnetzagentur, to classify its Gmail services as a telecommunications service. The Higher Administrative Court in Cologne, Germany, asked the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to decide whether Gmail met the requirements to qualify as a telecoms service. These are defined in EU and German law as transmitting electronic signals.
The ECJ found that Gmail's service did not “wholly or partially consist” of the transmission of signals. Although the sending of emails via Gmail involved the transmission of signals, the signals were transmitted by internet service providers, not Google itself, the court found.
“The ECJ rightly points out that not every service which includes the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks automatically falls under the stringent EU telecoms regulatory framework,” said Christoph Werkmeister, a lawyer with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in Düsseldorf.
If the ECJ had ruled in favour of the German regulator, Google and other providers of web-based email services could have faced a range of regulatory requirements that apply to telecommunications service companies.
These include obligations to share information about data transfers with law enforcement authorities as well as the possibility of being forced to make their services interoperable with other web-based services.
New EU legislation due to come into effect at the end of 2020, known as the European electronic communications code, is expected to apply to OTT services and impose stricter regulatory requirements on them.
Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.
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 AllBeyond Borders: Baker McKenzie Attorneys Stress the Need for a Global Outlook Cybersecurity and Data Privacy Matters
Cybersecurity Is Top-of-Mind for In-House Disputes Lawyers in 2024
Litigators of the Week: King & Spalding Wins a Botnet Case for Google, Sticks Defendants with Attorney Fees
'The Big Two': Big Company Legal and Risk Pros Continue to See Litigation Threats in Cybersecurity and ESG
Trending Stories
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