The CJEU’s take on unauthorized framing of online content: (only) if technologically precluded, then prohibited

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In a recent popular interview, the Duchess of Sussex expressed her idea of privacy by giving an example: exhibiting a picture of someone’s own child at the workplace or on social media – she argued – does not authorize co-workers or anyone else to access the whole photo gallery of family pictures.[1] Murmurs of appreciation have spread among privacy lawyers, who are ever busier showcasing the boundaries set by the fundamental protection of personal data, private and family life in the online environment. One may presume that copyright scholars were not equally satisfied with the example. The evolution of the discipline over the past two decades has mostly revolved around online uses of protected materials, thus emphasizing the question: what can Internet users do with the pictures that are made available to them?
In broad brush, the dispute at stake in Case C-392/19 VG Bild-Kunst[2] places itself within the contours of this fundamental query. The decision issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) represents a milestone in the interpretation of EU copyright rules, which puts some order into the fluid and often problematic notion of communication to the public in the online environment.
Original languageEnglish
JournalMediaLaws
Publication statusPublished - 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The CJEU’s take on unauthorized framing of online content: (only) if technologically precluded, then prohibited'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this