The Dutch filesharing site MyP2P cannot offer links to livestreams on its site. This follows from an injunction rendered by the District Court of The Hague today. Facilitating those livestreams of content is an unlawful act towards the UEFA and several sports organisations, which usually receive a license fee for allowing live content to be shown. That business model is hindered by MyP2P.
MyP2P is not deemed to be spreading the content itself. The content is not stored on its server, but is shared between the participants by means of a special software program. Every user is an uploader and a downloader at the same time, and the more participants there are, the better the quality will be (so MyP2P claims). Hence the Court holds that MyP2P structurally facilitates copyright infringements. MyP2P's lawyer referred to the site's Notice & Takedown Procedure. But the sports organisations explained that such procedure is too slow where it comes to prevent ingringements by showing live streams. In this case a more active approach is expected from MyP2P. The Court takes into account that MyP2P iself generated extra income through the site, while the right owners sustain damage due to a cut of license income.
This judgment fits well in the stream of jurisprudence regarding peer-to-peer sites. The BREIN foundation (representing large film producers) also forced FTD to stop facilitating copyright infringements of its members. And adult movie star Kim Holland received a positive judgment against online video site 123 Video in the Netherlands. That site was even considered to make the content available to the public itself, as coming from its own server. In that case copyright owner Kim Holland was represented by Hoogenraad & Haak.
The case of the football organisations provides another interesting insight. The English Premier League had waited for 18 months before initiating summary proceedings. Even though it concerns ongoing infringements, an urgent interest for obtaining an injunction is lacking according to the Court. Last month another judge from the District Court of The Hague even found a term of 9 months to be too long (but that case was settled after the session, no judgment was rendered). All the reason to act swiftly upon noticing an infringement of copyright or trademark.
Maarten Haak, copyright lawyer
|
office Emerald House Jozef Israëlskade 48-G Amsterdam, the Netherlands t +31 (0)20 - 305 3066 www.hoogenhaak.nl |
post PO Box 76780 1070 KB Amsterdam e info@hoogenhaak.nl f +31 (0)20 - 305 3069 chamber of commerce 34314579 |
The Dutch filesharing site MyP2P cannot offer links to livestreams on its site. This follows from an injunction rendered by the District Court of The Hague today. Facilitating those livestreams of content is an unlawful act towards the UEFA and several sports organisations, which usually receive a license fee for allowing live content to be shown. That business model is hindered by MyP2P.
MyP2P is not deemed to be spreading the content itself. The content is not stored on its server, but is shared between the participants by means of a special software program. Every user is an uploader and a downloader at the same time, and the more participants there are, the better the quality will be (so MyP2P claims). Hence the Court holds that MyP2P structurally facilitates copyright infringements. MyP2P's lawyer referred to the site's Notice & Takedown Procedure. But the sports organisations explained that such procedure is too slow where it comes to prevent ingringements by showing live streams. In this case a more active approach is expected from MyP2P. The Court takes into account that MyP2P iself generated extra income through the site, while the right owners sustain damage due to a cut of license income.
This judgment fits well in the stream of jurisprudence regarding peer-to-peer sites. The BREIN foundation (representing large film producers) also forced FTD to stop facilitating copyright infringements of its members. And adult movie star Kim Holland received a positive judgment against online video site 123 Video in the Netherlands. That site was even considered to make the content available to the public itself, as coming from its own server. In that case copyright owner Kim Holland was represented by Hoogenraad & Haak.
The case of the football organisations provides another interesting insight. The English Premier League had waited for 18 months before initiating summary proceedings. Even though it concerns ongoing infringements, an urgent interest for obtaining an injunction is lacking according to the Court. Last month another judge from the District Court of The Hague even found a term of 9 months to be too long (but that case was settled after the session, no judgment was rendered). All the reason to act swiftly upon noticing an infringement of copyright or trademark.
Maarten Haak, copyright lawyer