Cologne Regional Court upholds strict influencer jurisprudence

There is already a lot of content on my blog about the question of whether and when influencers and streamers have to label their content. Most of them…

There is already a lot of content on my blog about the question of whether and when influencers and streamers have to label their content. Most of them are very strict with influencers and what needs to be labeled and how.

Many colleagues are quite of the opinion that the verdict is too strict. Hope sprouted among these colleagues when the Munich Higher Regional Court took a less strict line in the Cathy Hummels case (see this article), thus confirming the Munich Regional Court (see this article). Shortly afterwards, the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg also seemed to change its mind and ruled that obvious advertising would not have to be marked (see this article). But when is advertising obvious?

The Regional Court of Cologne agrees with the strict courts on this issue, stating that

From an objective point of view, the posts are also aimed at influencing the business decisions of other market participants, at least due to the tags they contain relating to fashion companies […] and a manufacturer of make-up.

This is sufficient for the court, because

The mere intention of the influencer to possibly act commercially was sufficient for the court:

The Cologne Regional Court considered other representations to be protective allegations:

As a further indication, the court also saw here the links, which would not be necessary if there were no commercial intentions:

The Higher Regional Court of Braunschweig had already ruled similarly last year(see this article).