Press Law

Judgement of LG Köln (Regional Court Cologne) of 12/05/2010, file number: 28 O 175/10

A nationwide well-known weather forecaster must not tolerate that the press publishes concrete details about the investigation concerning the procedure against him. Although the rape allegations count with an important public interest, they could cause a difficult complete rehabilitation of the weather forecaster in case of exculpation.

Judgement of KG Berlin (Superior Court of Justice Berlin) of 15/06/2010, file number: 5 U 35/08

Copies of already published photographs are certainly permissible as a part of a quotation and if they are not only used with pure decorative and illustrative purposes. The reproduction of an unmodified small picture in a larger picture shows a “copyright relevant intervention” according to §§ 72, 15, 16 UrhG (German Copyright Act).

Judgement of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 02/03/2010, file number: VI ZR 23/09

Provided that an article published on the Internet injures the personality right of someone and shows at the same time a clear relation to Germany, the legal way to German courts is opened. A plaintiff resident in Germany took legal actions against the publisher of the newspaper “The New York Times” as well as against the author resident in New York, since the published article injured the plaintiff’s right.

Judgement of LG Hamburg (Regional Court Hamburg) of 04/12/2009, file number: 324 O 338/09

The bare publishing of a paparazzi photo does not mean that the photographed public figure “collects promotionally”. In this case a known German photographer considered that he could require royalty payments from the defendant, since the publication of the photo shows him by reading a known Sunday paper. Nevertheless, the Regional Court Hamburg did not share that opinion. In case of pure journalistic use of the picture, the photographed cannot claim for remuneration. 

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.

Press release No. 227/2009 of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) about the decision of 10/11/2009, file number: VI ZR 217/08

The Federal Supreme Court allows  the  Europeam Court  of Justice to clear the question of the international court competence about forbereance regarding naming by the suppliers who are settled in another member state.

Judgement of LG Berlin (Regional Court Berlin) of 20/08/2009, file number: 27 O 529/09

The Berlin district court confirms an injunction against a newspaper publisher due to an article in which the private sphere of a well-known singer was injured. The article informed about supposed rumours about an affair of the singer with a colleague. Spreading such suppositions about the love-life is inadmissible since the publication of such speculations lacked on information and therefore the interference in the private sphere of the singer was not justified.

Judgement of LG Köln (Regional Court Cologne) of 30/07/2008, file number: 28 O 148/08

A monetary indemnity of 15,000 € was assigned to the wife of a known television presenter due to the unjustified publication of the wedding ceremony on a magazine. The judges of the regional court Cologne explained the monetary indemnity with the fact that the plaintiff’s personality rights were considerably injured by the publication of the pictures. Pictures of the wedding, which she consciously planned excluding the public.

Decision of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 30/06/2009, file number: VI ZR 339/08

A monetary indemnity due to insistent serious injury of the right in own picture depends on the particular cases evaluation; children must be protected more comprehensive than adults. Cease and desist letter and measures of compliance would have a satisfaction function.

Decision of OLG Köln (HRC Cologne) of 19/06/2009, file number 15 W 32/09

If a debtor of an omission court order publishes on his web page lists corresponding to lawsuits under specification of reference number, date and ending of the procedure and the central concepts from which use he has to omit, no offence against the statement ban or the court order is given.

By an objective and shortened reporting about such trials the right on freedom of expression outbalances potential personality rights. There, it is no repeating freshining up of forbidden statements.

Judgement of OLG Hamburg (HRC Hamburg) of 10/03/2009, file number: 7 U 65/08

If the name of an offender is spread in an Internet archive of a newspaper, this can claim to omission due to the injury of his general personal right. The name is spread by the accessibility and the possibility of the inspection of the article. Shortly before the dismissal this must not been tolerated anymore, since the public interest was directed upon the prosecution and conviction and the public is already enough informed about it. 

Judgement of OLG Hamm (HRC Hamm) of 17/03/2009, file number: 4 U 184/08

Screenshots show no logical thought for the existence of an online offer and, hence, can justify no competitive relation. A compulsory journalistic reporting lies beyond the events according to competition. If an opinion is indirectly expressed, it is enough if it stands in connection with the external appearance, so the fact core of the statement is proved.

Press release of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 17.02.2009, file number: VI ZR 75/08

Also celebrities are able to prohibit the publication and spreading of photos, which were taken in public, if these exhibit private life processes. The right on personality free development is priority in such situation.