ECJ: No Copyright Infringement If Hyperlinking Does Not Reach A New Public


On 13 February, the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter the "Court") rendered an important judgment on the scope of legitimate hyperlinking. Hyperlinking to protected works that are already freely accessible on another website does not constitute copyright infringement by the hyperlinking party because the works are not made available to a new public. The Court ruled that it is irrelevant in this respect if the hyperlinking party gives the impression that the work is appearing on its own website when the work in fact comes from another website. The case at hand is Svensson et al./RetrieverSverige and is the most recent in the following line of judgments: SGAE, Football Association Premier League and ITV Broadcasting.

Hyperlinks are very common in today's online world. A hyperlink gives the user of a site access to additional content by clicking on the link. This access is either direct - clicking on the link causes the user to be redirected to another website - or indirect through the intervention of the hyperlinking party, called embedded linking. In the case of embedded linking, the additional third-party content is presented within the hyperlinking website.

In the present case, Retriever Sverige's website provided the visitor with clickable links to press articles written by journalists Svensson et al. and published on, inter alia, the Göteborgs-Posten website, where the articles were freely accessible.

Hyperlinking to third-party content without the copyright owner's consent constitutes copyright infringement if the content is a protected work and the hyperlinking is considered to be an 'act of communication' of a work 'to the public' within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the Copyright Directive (Directive 2001/29 /EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society). However, a communication made by the same technical means as the initial communication authorised by the copyright owner will not be considered a communication 'to the public' unless it is directed to a new public, i.e. a public that was not taken into account by the copyright owner when authorising the initial communication to the public.

Act of communication?

It follows from previous case law of the Court - Football Association Premier League (cases C-403/08 and C-429/08) and SGAE (case C-306/05) - that the term 'act of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT