- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-788/24, Anne Frank Fonds: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 14 November 2024 – Anne Frank Fonds v Anne Frank Stichting, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Vereniging voor Onderzoek en Ontsluiting van Historische Teksten
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0788
62024CN0788
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2025/1214
3.3.2025
(Case C-788/24, Anne Frank Fonds)
(C/2025/1214)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Anne Frank Fonds
Defendants: Anne Frank Stichting, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Vereniging voor Onderzoek en Ontsluiting van Historische Teksten
Questions referred
1.Is Article 3(1) of the Copyright Directive (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the publication of a work on the internet is only to be regarded as a communication to the public in a particular country if the publication is addressed to the public in that country? If so, what factors must be considered in assessing that?
2.Can there be a communication to the public in a particular country if, by means of (state-of-the-art) geo-blocking, it is ensured that the website on which the work is published can only be accessed by the public in that country by circumventing the blocking measure using a VPN or similar service? Is the extent to which the public in the blocked country is willing and able to access the website in question via such a service of relevance in that respect? In answering this question, does it make any difference whether, in addition to the measure of geo-blocking, other measures were taken to impede or discourage public access to the website in the blocked country?
3.If the possibility of circumventing the blocking measure entails the communication of the work published on the internet to the public in the blocked country within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the Copyright Directive, is that communication made by the party who published the work on the internet, even though knowledge of that communication requires the intervention of the provider of the VPN or similar service in question?
(1) Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10).
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1214/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—