Elvis Presley has been supposedly exploited by his record company during his lifetime. At least this is what his descendants maintain suiting Sony Music Entertainment as Presley’s former record company. Antenne Bayern interviews Julian N. Modi, LL.M., certified lawyer in IT-Law about the rights of the heirs. They base their claim on § 32a Copyright Act (UrhG) that states that the artist is also later entitled to compensation in case that the new owner of the right of use has unexpected success with the work of art.

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 LG Berlin (Regional Court Berlin) of 27/04/2010, file number; 27 O 66/10

The plaintiff, a famous comedian, is in an alimony dispute with his father, who had admitted to the press in the past that he was impoverished and dependent on the maintenance of his son. The father’s lawyers wrote that “it is written in the stars to what extend such procedure can be kept away from the interest of the public”. The plaintiff demanded an omission from his father to speak to the media about the alimony procedure and about the fact that the plaintiff pays no maintenance. Thereafter, an article was published in which the father was quoted with the words: “My...

Judgement of LG Hamburg (Regional Court Hamburg) of 29/05/2009, file number: 324 O 1002/08

If a sportsman offends against the anti-doping regulations, the offence may be published. The plaintiff, member of the accused rowing club, offended against these rules, whereupon a warning to the sportsman was published on the homepage of the defendant. Herein the sportsman saw his general personality right injured. Nevertheless, the Regional Court of Hamburg did not share this view: Though the personality right is affected, however, in justified manner. In fact, there would be a public interest in this information, since doping offence is an important sports...

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. 

As the Federal Cartel Office has informed, the food giant Kraft Food Deutschland GmbH provided with essential information in the preliminary proceedings against the three most important German coffee roasters; Melitta, Dallmayr and Tschibo. Just before Christmas, the Federal Cartel Office imposed a fine of 160 million euro to the three coffee roasters.

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 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 München (Regional Court Munich) of 23/01/2009, file number: 21 O 13662/07

An illustrator, due to the drawing of figures or drawing of scenes with doubtful figures, does not become a co-author of the literary characters or the whole literary work. Hence, this helps neither immediately nor indirectly in doubtful works and can raise no claims for compensation.

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.