Broadcasting Law

The Administrative Court of Baden-Württemberg decided that in case of a marriage-like partnership, the TV licensing fee should only paid once (Sentence dated August 21, 2008, file number: 2 S 1519/08).

Judgement of AG Bremen-Blumenthal (Local Court Bremen-Blumenthal) of 23/08/2010, file number: 42 C 43/10

Property owners may restrain GEZ employees from unreported and unauthorised trespassing and, GEZ employees may also be banned from premises. This could happen provided that the GEZ employees’ purpose is obtaining the necessary information to collect the license fee. GEZ is not entitled to get any other information as the stated on the broadcasting contract. In case that the ban from the premises is infringed, the property owner’s privacy may be violated.

Judgement of LG Berlin (Regional Court Berlin) of 29/09/2009, file number: 27 O 736/09

Without concrete and actual reason, the reporting about the state of health of a celebrity is inadmissible, since this concerns the main area of privacy. A known entertainer and comedy actress was seriously ill; this was compared in the media with the situation of host who was also ill. However, the illness of any third person who has no relation with the first mentioned person shows no “actual reason”, therefore, the reporting injures the general Personality Right.

Judgement of HansOLG (Higher Regional Court Hamburg) of 24/11/2009, file number: 7 U 76/09

The Higher Regional Court Hamburg has decided about a radio station which has spread false statements within the scope of an interview. Indeed, it was evident that the false statements came from a third party and that the radio station did not maintain them. However, the radio station is liable for them since it does not dissociate itself enough from the false statements.

Judgement of LG Berlin (Regional Court Berlin) of 31/01/2008, file number: 27 O 1000/07

Basically every person can determine whether portraits from themselves can be used and published. This also concerns film shoots. Television broadcasting stations, which film people, must have the explicit approval from those people to emit the images. Even if these people tolerate the recording, it is not enough to emit the images if they do not give an explicit approval. In case that these images should be broadcasted anyway, the identity of the filmed people should be unrecognizable.

Press release No. 201/2009 of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) about the judgement of 01/10/2009, file number: I ZR 134/09

Amusing and ironic comparisons in a commercial are allowed within certain limits. If the advertising does not disrate the competitor, nor reveals the absurdity creating a merely amusing exaggeration, the advertising does not act in an anticompetitive manner.

Press release of OVG Nordrhein-Westfalen (Higher Administrative Court Nordrhein-Westfalen) of 26/05/2009, file number: 8 A 2690/08 and 8 A 732/09

The 8th senate of the higher administrative court of North Rheine-Westphalia has decided in two judgements of May 26, 2009 that broadcasting licence fees must be paid for a private PC with Internet access in case no other receiver devise exists.

Press release of LG München I (Regional Court Munich I) about the judgement of 28/05/2009, file number: 7 O 17548/08

In the dispute about the contractual penalty demand of more than 26,000,000€ of the Premiere Fernsehen GmbH und Co. KG against the Kathrein-Werke KG, the 7th civil division of the Regional Court Munich I has dismissed the case in a current decision.

Judgement of LG Köln (Regional Court Köln) of 13/05/2009, file number: 28 O 811/08

A TV-station has broadcasted, in its breakfast programme, foreign broadcasting material several times without licence. This is generally allowed for the purposes of reporting about events of the day (§ 50 UhrG – Copyright Act) and use of citations (§ 51 UhrG – Copyright Act), nevertheless is subject to high requirements. The contribution of foreign material may merely bolster. A new work must be originated. In case of prevailing compositions of foreign film material, the author would be involved in the economic exploitation of his work.

Judgement of AG Köln (Local Court Cologne) of 04/06/2009, file number: 137 C 590/08

A customer has connected a radio in the office, afterwards he has gone away. A public reproduction of radio transmissions shall be represented by the manager only if he has known about that and he has wanted it (§ 15 paragraph 2, 3 UrhG – Copyright Act). The fact that he has not asked his employees to interrupt the transmission promptly is not a reliable conclusion.