Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 September 2016

GS Media BV v Sanoma Media Netherlands BV and Others

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Information society — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights — Article 3(1) — Communication to the public — Definition — Internet — Hyperlinks giving access to protected works, made accessible on another website without the rightholder’s consent — Works not yet published by the rightholder — Posting of such links for a profit

Case C-160/15


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2016:644
08/09/2016 GS Media
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2016:644
08/09/2016 GS Media
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2016:221
07/04/2016 GS Media
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
05/06/2015 GS Media
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1.
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.11 Approximation of laws
    4.11.01 Directives concerning approximation of law
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.11 Approximation of laws
    4.11.01 Directives concerning approximation of law


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2007), Article 11 : paragraphs 31, 45
  • Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2007), Article 17 -P2 : paragraph 31
  • Directive 2001/29 -A03 : paragraph 4
  • Directive 2001/29 -A03P1 : paragraphs 1, 24 - 55
  • Directive 2001/29 -A05P3 : paragraphs 5, 53
  • Directive 2001/29 -A05P5 : paragraph 5
  • Directive 2001/29 -A08P2 : paragraph 33
  • Directive 2001/29 -C3 : paragraph 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C4 : paragraph 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C9 : paragraph 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C10 : paragraph 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C23 : paragraph 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C31 : paragraph 3
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/05 -N33 : paragraph 29
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/05 -N34 : paragraph 29
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N184 : paragraph 29
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N185 : paragraph 29
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N186 : paragraph 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N204 : paragraph 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N75 : paragraph 28
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N79 : paragraph 34
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N82 : paragraph 35
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N84 : paragraph 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N88 : paragraph 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -162/10 -N29 : paragraph 33
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -162/10 -N30 : paragraph 34
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -162/10 -N31 : paragraph 35
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -162/10 -N33 : paragraph 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -162/10 -N36 : paragraph 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -607/11 -N20 : paragraph 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 : paragraphs 20, 21, 23, 40, 43
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N16 : paragraph 32
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N18 : paragraph 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N19 : paragraph 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N20 : paragraph 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N21 : paragraph 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N22 : paragraph 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N23 : paragraph 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N24 : paragraphs 37, 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N25 : paragraph 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N26 : paragraph 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N27 : paragraphs 42, 50
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N28 : paragraph 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N31 : paragraph 50
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 : paragraphs 21, 40, 43
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 -N14 : paragraph 37
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 -N15 : paragraph 42
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 -N16 : paragraph 42
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 -N18 : paragraph 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -325/14 -N15 : paragraph 32
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -117/15 -N30 : paragraph 28
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -117/15 -N33 : paragraph 33
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -117/15 -N35 : paragraph 34
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -117/15 -N37 : paragraph 32

Operative part

  • Interprets : Directive 2001/29 -A03P1

Opinion

  • Directive 2000/31 -A14 : point 82
  • Directive 2000/31 -A14P1 : point 86
  • Directive 2001/29 : points 27, 47
  • Directive 2001/29 -A03 : point 4
  • Directive 2001/29 -A03P1 : points 1, 20, 23, 24, 26, 30, 34 - 38, 40 - 44, 46, 50, 59, 60, 61, 63, 65, 73, 76, 77, 78, 80, 84, 88
  • Directive 2001/29 -A06 : points 5, 73
  • Directive 2001/29 -A08 : point 6
  • Directive 2001/29 -A08P3 : point 82
  • Directive 2001/29 -C2 : points 3, 77
  • Directive 2001/29 -C23 : points 3, 48, 51
  • Directive 2001/29 -C3 : point 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C31 : points 3, 77
  • Directive 2001/29 -C4 : point 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C5 : point 3
  • Directive 2001/29 -C59 : point 83
  • Directive 2001/29 -C9 : point 3
  • Directive 2001/31 -A14 : point 7
  • Directive 2004/48 -A09 : point 81
  • Directive 2004/48 -A10 : point 81
  • Directive 2004/48 -A11 : points 8, 81, 82, 84
  • Directive 2004/48 -A11 : point 82
  • Directive 2004/48 -A12 : point 81
  • Directive 2004/48 -A13 : point 81
  • Directive 2004/48 -A14 : point 81
  • Directive 2004/48 -A15 : point 81
  • Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (2012) -A99 : point 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/05 -N42 : points 58, 69
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 : points 55, 56, 57
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N184 : points -, 185, , 47
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N186 : point 50
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08 -N197 : point 67
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -324/09 : point 86
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -393/09 : point 50
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 : point 57
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N82 : point 55
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/10 -N92 : point 55
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -162/10 -N31 : point 55
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -283/10 : points 49, 50
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -360/10 -N27 : point 82
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -360/10 -N28 : point 82
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -355/12 -N24 : point 73
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 : points 18, 19, 22, 25, 26, 28, 40, 44, 49, 51, 52, 68, 76
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N20 : point 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N23 : point 66
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N31 : point 74
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N32 : point 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N15 : point 46
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N16 : points 47, 65
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N18 : point 54
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N24 : point 67
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N31 : point 67
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N25 : point 71
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N26 : point 71
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N27 : points 39, 58, 69
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -466/12 -N31 : points 58, 73
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -279/13 -N25 : point 47
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 : points 19, 40, 41
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 -N11 : point 42
  • Court of Justice - Order C -348/13 -N14 : point 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -325/14 -N15 : point 61
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -325/14 -N24 : point 61


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 07/04/2015

Date of the Opinion

  • 07/04/2016

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

08/09/2016


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Judgment: OJ C 402 from 31.10.2016, p.7

Application: OJ C 205 from 22.06.2015, p.18

Name of the parties

GS Media

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Costes, Lionel: Liens hypertextes renvoyant à des contenus protégés par le droit d'auteur et acte de "comunication au public", Droit de l'immatériel : informatique, médias, communication 2016 Juin nº 127 p.13-14 (FR)
  2. Seignette, J.M.B.: Intellectuele eigendom & Reclamerecht 2016 p.321-323 (NL)
  3. Schmidt-Wudy, Florian: Haftung für Hyperlinks auf ohne Er­laubnis des Rechteinhabers veröffentlichte Inhalte, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2016 p.789-790 (DE)
  4. Wimmers, Jörg ; Barudi, Malek ; Rendle, Adam: The CJEU’s Communication to the Public: Better Check Before Placing a Hyperlink?, Computer Law Review International 2016 p.129-133 (EN)
  5. Jani, Ole ; Leenen, Frederik: Paradigmenwechsel bei Links und Framings, Neue juristische Wochenschrift 2016 p.3135-3138 (DE)
  6. Visser, D.J.G.: Hyperlinken naar illegale bron, Ars aequi 2016 p.880-881 (NL)
  7. Visser, Dirk: Bom onder het internet?, Nederlands juristenblad 2016 p.3186-3187 (NL)
  8. Van Eechoud, Mireille ; Poort, Joost: Bom onder het internet - naschrift, Nederlands juristenblad 2016 p.3188 (NL)
  9. Senftleben, M.R.F.: Copyright Reform, GS Media and Innovation Climate in the EU - Euphonious Chord or Dissonant Cacophony?, AMI: Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media & informatierecht 2016 p.130-133 (EN)
  10. Senftleben, M.R.F.: AMI: Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media & informatierecht 2016 p.138-139 (NL)
  11. Van Eechoud, Mireille ; Poort, Joost: Hof van Justitie legt bom onder het internet, Nederlands juristenblad 2016 p.2763-2764 (NL)
  12. Skubic, Zoran: Objava hiperpovezav na nezakonito objavljena avtorsko varovana dela, Pravna praksa 2016 nº 44 p.33-34 (SL)
  13. Mazilu-Babel, Mihaela: CJUE. C-160/15 GS Media. Drepturi de autor. Noțiunea de "comunicare publică". Internet. Drepturi fundamentale aflate în concurență. Echilibrul just, Pandectele Romane: repertoriu trimestrial de jurisprudenta, doctrina si legislatie 2016 Vol. 11 p.63-75 (RO)
  14. Gazin, Fabienne: Les liens hypertexte renvoyant vers des sites permettant le téléchargement d'oeuvres protégées constituent-il des actes de communication au public ? Position mesurée du juge..., Europe 2016 Novembre Comm. nº 11 p.38 (FR)
  15. Marino, Laure: Liens hypertexte et droit d'auteur : à la rencontre de la troisième voie, La Semaine Juridique - édition générale 2016 nº 46 p.2090-2092 (FR)
  16. Leistner, Matthias: Anmerkung zu EuGH, Urteil vom 8. September 2016 - C-160/15, Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht 2016 p.980-983 (DE)
  17. Busseuil, Guillaume: Propriété intellectuelle, fourniture d’hyperliens et communication au public, Droit de l'immatériel : informatique, médias, communication 2016 nº 132 p.8-11 (FR)
  18. Zemann, Adolf: Hyperlinks zu zustimmungslos online gestellten Werken, Ecolex 2016 p.1088 (DE)
  19. Rauer, Nils ; Ettig, Diana: Der EuGH zur Öffentlichen Wiedergabe, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 2016 p.1319-1322 (DE)
  20. Etteldorf, Christina: EuGH: Das Setzen von Links kann legal sein, Multimedia und Recht 2016 p.XII (DE)
  21. Ohly, Ansgar: Keine "öffentliche Wiedergabe" durch Hyperlinksetzen ohne Gewinnerzielungsabsicht, Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2016 p.1155-1157 (DE)
  22. Giorgi, Florence: Circulation des œuvres protégées sur Internet: la Cour de justice en quête d’un impossible équilibre?, Revue des affaires européennes 2016 p.539-546 (FR)
  23. Linklater, Emma: Oh Boy, Playboy: Profit-making Motive and Knowledge of the Illegality of Unauthorised Content Make Hyperlinking a Communication to the Public, European Law Reporter 2016 p.208-212 (EN)
  24. Smith, Joel ; Newton, Heather: Hyperlinking to Material on the Internet: The CJEU Expands on the Circumstances when it may Amount to Copyright Infringement, European Intellectual Property Review 2016 p.768-771 (EN)
  25. Volkmann, Caroline: Verlinkung & Haftung: Bedeutet die EuGH-Trilogie das Aus für die Informationsfreiheit und den Meinungsaustausch im Internet?, Computer und Recht 2017 p.36-43 (DE)
  26. Hildebrand, Angela: Die Bedeutung der EuGH-Urteile »ACI Adam« und »GS Media« für die deutsche Privatkopieschranke, Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht 2017 p.16-23 (DE)
  27. Michaux, Benoït: Arrêt « GS Media »: un hyperlien vers une oeuvre publiée sans autorisation peut constituer une infraction au droit d’auteur, Journal de droit européen 2017 nº 236 p.53-54 (FR)
  28. Haak, M.F.J. ; Truijens, M.M.: GS Media/Sanoma: oppassen met bedrijfsmatig linken, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2017 p.24-28 (NL)
  29. Hanuz, Bianca: Linking to unauthorized content after the CJEU GS Media decision, Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht INT 2017 p.97-98 (EN)
  30. Handig, Christian: Link zur unerlaubten Veröffentlichung, Österreichische Blätter für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2017 p.59-60 (DE)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden - Netherlands

Subject-matter

  • Approximation of laws
  • Intellectual, industrial and commercial property

Procedure and result

  • Reference for a preliminary ruling

Formation of the Court

deuxième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Ilešič

Advocate General

Wathelet

Language(s) of the Case

  • Dutch

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French