YouTube won a major legal battle over copyright infringement after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) said that online platforms are not responsible for users uploading unauthorized work unless the platforms are not. have taken swift action to remove or block access to content.

As the CJEU ruled: “As currently established, online platform operators, in principle, do not themselves make a communication to the public of content protected by copyright illegally published online by users of those platforms. However , those operators make such communication in violation of copyright when they contribute, beyond simply making those platforms available, to give access to such content to the public. ”

The court stated that the platforms could also be liable if they fail to implement the appropriate technological tools to address copyright violations by their users or if they provide tools on their platforms for illegal content sharing.

The popular video platform was satisfied with the ruling, reiterating, through a spokesperson, that “YouTube is a leader in copyright and supports rights holders to be paid their fair share.”

“That is why we have invested in state-of-the-art copyright tools that have created an entirely new source of revenue for the industry. In the last 12 months alone we have paid $ 4 billion to the music industry, more than 30% of which come from user-generated content, “he added.

This ruling is expected to set an important precedent for the deep battle between rights holders, particularly from the entertainment industry, and online hosting platforms.

This particular case started when Frank Peterson, a music producer, sued YouTube and its owner company, Google, in Germany for uploading to the platform, by users, in 2008 of several phonograms to which he owns the rights. .

According to the European media, a second case, the Elsevier publishing group took legal action against the file hosting service Cyando in Germany after its users uploaded several Elsevier works to its Uploaded platform in 2013 without its approval.

Subsequently, a German court sought the advice of the EU Court of Justice, which ruled on both cases.

Brands Protection News