• Mehr als 3 Millionen Wörter Inhalt
  • |
  • info@itmedialaw.com
  • |
  • Tel: 03322 5078053
Rechtsanwalt Marian Härtel - ITMediaLaw

No products in the cart.

  • en English
  • de Deutsch
  • Informationen
    • Ideal partner
    • About lawyer Marian Härtel
    • Quick and flexible access
    • Principles as a lawyer
    • Why a lawyer and business consultant?
    • Focus areas of attorney Marian Härtel
      • Focus on start-ups
      • Investment advice
      • Corporate law
      • Cryptocurrencies, Blockchain and Games
      • AI and SaaS
      • Streamers and influencers
      • Games and esports law
      • IT/IP Law
      • Law firm for GMBH,UG, GbR
      • Law firm for IT/IP and media law
    • The everyday life of an IT lawyer
    • How can I help clients?
    • Testimonials
    • Team: Saskia Härtel – WHO AM I?
    • Agile and lean law firm
    • Price overview
    • Various information
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Imprint
  • Services
    • Support and advice of agencies
    • Contract review and preparation
    • Games law consulting
    • Consulting for influencers and streamers
    • Advice in e-commerce
    • DLT and Blockchain consulting
    • Legal advice in corporate law: from incorporation to structuring
    • Legal compliance and expert opinions
    • Outsourcing – for companies or law firms
    • Booking as speaker
  • News
    • Gloss / Opinion
    • Law on the Internet
    • Online retail
    • Law and computer games
    • Law and Esport
    • Blockchain and web law
    • Data protection Law
    • Copyright
    • Labour law
    • Competition law
    • Corporate
    • EU law
    • Law on the protection of minors
    • Tax
    • Other
    • Internally
  • Podcast
    • ITMediaLaw Podcast
  • Knowledge base
  • Videos
    • Information videos – about Marian Härtel
    • Videos – about me (Couch)
    • Blogpost – individual videos
    • Videos on services
    • Shorts
    • Podcast format
    • Third-party videos
    • Other videos
  • Contact
Kurzberatung
  • Informationen
    • Ideal partner
    • About lawyer Marian Härtel
    • Quick and flexible access
    • Principles as a lawyer
    • Why a lawyer and business consultant?
    • Focus areas of attorney Marian Härtel
      • Focus on start-ups
      • Investment advice
      • Corporate law
      • Cryptocurrencies, Blockchain and Games
      • AI and SaaS
      • Streamers and influencers
      • Games and esports law
      • IT/IP Law
      • Law firm for GMBH,UG, GbR
      • Law firm for IT/IP and media law
    • The everyday life of an IT lawyer
    • How can I help clients?
    • Testimonials
    • Team: Saskia Härtel – WHO AM I?
    • Agile and lean law firm
    • Price overview
    • Various information
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Imprint
  • Services
    • Support and advice of agencies
    • Contract review and preparation
    • Games law consulting
    • Consulting for influencers and streamers
    • Advice in e-commerce
    • DLT and Blockchain consulting
    • Legal advice in corporate law: from incorporation to structuring
    • Legal compliance and expert opinions
    • Outsourcing – for companies or law firms
    • Booking as speaker
  • News
    • Gloss / Opinion
    • Law on the Internet
    • Online retail
    • Law and computer games
    • Law and Esport
    • Blockchain and web law
    • Data protection Law
    • Copyright
    • Labour law
    • Competition law
    • Corporate
    • EU law
    • Law on the protection of minors
    • Tax
    • Other
    • Internally
  • Podcast
    • ITMediaLaw Podcast
  • Knowledge base
  • Videos
    • Information videos – about Marian Härtel
    • Videos – about me (Couch)
    • Blogpost – individual videos
    • Videos on services
    • Shorts
    • Podcast format
    • Third-party videos
    • Other videos
  • Contact
Rechtsanwalt Marian Härtel - ITMediaLaw

Diverging OLG decisions on the release of names on Kununu

28. January 2025
in Other
Reading Time: 4 mins read
0 0
A A
0
judge 3678152 1280
Key Facts
  • According to the OLG Dresden, the anonymity of the reviewer has priority in many cases.
  • The OLG Hamburg emphasizes the right of companies to verify their identity.
  • The diverging rulings create legal uncertainty for platforms such as Kununu and companies.
  • Companies and platform operators must develop new review processes to take account of both court rulings.
  • The Federal Court of Justice could soon contribute to a uniform solution in this area of law.
  • Companies should rethink their strategies for contesting valuations and become more proactive.
  • Legal disputes can offer both risks and opportunities for companies.

Two recent rulings by higher regional courts show that the question of the anonymity of reviewers on employer review portals such as Kununu is anything but clear-cut. These decisions also make it clear that it is not always necessary to accept a Higher Regional Court decision if different courts come to different conclusions. The judgments of the Higher Regional Court of Dresden and the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg are exemplary of the complex legal situation in this area. While one court focuses on the protection of anonymity, the other emphasizes the companies’ right to review. This divergence reflects the challenge of finding an appropriate balance between the interests of the evaluators and the evaluated companies. Case law must weigh up the importance of employer review portals for transparency in the labor market against the protection of companies from unjustified reviews. This also highlights the need to continuously develop the legal framework for digital platforms. This results in considerable legal uncertainty for companies and platform operators, which can only be eliminated by clarification from the highest court.

Content Hide
1. The OLG Dresden: Protection of anonymity
2. The OLG Hamburg: Right to review
3. The consequences for Kununu and companies
4. Outlook
5. Conclusion
5.1. Author: Marian Härtel

The OLG Dresden: Protection of anonymity

The Dresden Higher Regional Court took a clear position in its ruling of 17.12.2024 (Ref. 4 U 744/24): The anonymity of reviewers has priority. The court argues that Kununu, as a platform operator, is not obliged to disclose the identity of the reviewer. Instead, it is sufficient for Kununu to carry out an appropriate review in the event of complaints by companies. The OLG Dresden emphasizes:

“Unlimited disclosure of the reviewer’s identity cannot be demanded as a rule.”

The platform must respond to complaints from companies, clarify the facts and obtain evidence of an actual employment relationship. This evidence must be submitted to the company in anonymized form. The court thus recognizes the importance of anonymous reviews for freedom of expression and the flow of information. It considers the platform operator to be primarily responsible for carrying out an appropriate review without revealing the identity of the reviewer. This decision strengthens the position of employees, who can share their experiences without fear of reprisals. At the same time, the court emphasizes that companies are not defenceless against unjustified reviews by imposing verification obligations on platform operators.

The OLG Hamburg: Right to review

This contrasts with the ruling of the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg from 28.01.2025 (case no. 7 U 16/24). Here, the judges argue that companies must have the right to verify the existence of an actual employment relationship. The Hamburg judges emphasize:

“Even if § 21 TTDSG […] should have this consequence, this should not mean that a rating may be kept publicly accessible as long as the rated person is deprived of the opportunity to clarify whether it is based on a business contact with the rater at all”.

The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg argues that anonymized evidence is not sufficient if the company is unable to verify the identity as a result. The company must not be deprived of the opportunity to verify its own identity, and data protection concerns cannot override the need for identification.
The court sees the possibility of verification as an essential protection for companies against false or malicious reviews. It emphasizes that the rights of companies must not take second place to the protection of anonymity. This decision strengthens the position of employers and underlines their right to protection against unjustified reputational damage. At the same time, the court acknowledges that this can lead to a conflict with data protection regulations, but does not see this as an insurmountable obstacle.

The consequences for Kununu and companies

These divergent rulings pose considerable challenges for Kununu and similar platforms. On the one hand, they are intended to protect the anonymity of reviewers; on the other, they must give companies the opportunity to challenge unjustified reviews. For companies, this means that they could have different rights when reviewing reviews depending on the jurisdiction. This underlines the importance of not being too quick to settle for a single OLG decision, but to carefully examine the legal situation and pursue legal action if necessary. Platform operators must now develop processes that take both court decisions into account, which can lead to a complex review process. Companies should reconsider their strategies for dealing with employer reviews and possibly be more proactive in reviewing and challenging reviews. The different legal opinions may lead to inconsistent handling of reviews, which could affect the credibility and usefulness of employer review portals. At the same time, this situation offers companies the opportunity to actively defend their legal position and, if necessary, to help clarify the legal situation through further court proceedings.

Outlook

The discrepancy between the rulings shows that there is still a considerable need for clarification in this area. It is to be expected that this issue will be taken up by the Federal Court of Justice in the near future and that a uniform solution will have to be found. Until then, platforms such as Kununu are operating in a legal gray area in which they have to perform a difficult balancing act between protecting the reviewers and the rights of the companies. The BGH’s decision will point the way for the future of employer review portals and could have far-reaching consequences for the entire industry. It is conceivable that the BGH will find a middle way that guarantees both the anonymity of the reviewers and the verifiability for companies to a certain extent. It is possible that a multi-stage procedure will be developed that takes both sides into account. Until final clarification, companies should actively exercise their rights and, if necessary, take legal action. At the same time, rating platforms should make their processes as transparent and fair as possible in order to maintain the trust of all parties involved.

Conclusion

The diverging OLG rulings make it clear that the legal battle for the rights of companies and reviewers on employer review portals is far from over. Companies should be aware that a single OLG decision does not necessarily mean the end of the road. The different approaches of the Higher Regional Courts of Dresden and Hamburg show that it can be worthwhile to continue to pursue your own legal position. In such a dynamically developing area of law, another Higher Regional Court may well come to a different decision. This underlines the need to assess each situation individually and, if necessary, to take legal action up to the Federal Court of Justice in order to obtain clarity and legal certainty. Companies should reconsider their strategies for dealing with employer reviews and possibly take a more proactive approach to reviewing and challenging reviews. At the same time, they must weigh up the extent to which legal action against reviews could damage their image. Platform operators face the challenge of adapting their business models to the evolving case law and possibly implementing new procedures for verifying reviews. The current legal uncertainty also offers opportunities for innovative solutions that take into account the interests of both reviewers and companies.

 

Marian Härtel
Author: Marian Härtel

Marian Härtel ist Rechtsanwalt und Fachanwalt für IT-Recht mit einer über 25-jährigen Erfahrung als Unternehmer und Berater in den Bereichen Games, E-Sport, Blockchain, SaaS und Künstliche Intelligenz. Seine Beratungsschwerpunkte umfassen neben dem IT-Recht insbesondere das Urheberrecht, Medienrecht sowie Wettbewerbsrecht. Er betreut schwerpunktmäßig Start-ups, Agenturen und Influencer, die er in strategischen Fragen, komplexen Vertragsangelegenheiten sowie bei Investitionsprojekten begleitet. Dabei zeichnet sich seine Beratung durch einen interdisziplinären Ansatz aus, der juristische Expertise und langjährige unternehmerische Erfahrung miteinander verbindet. Ziel seiner Tätigkeit ist stets, Mandanten praxisorientierte Lösungen anzubieten und rechtlich fundierte Unterstützung bei der Umsetzung innovativer Geschäftsmodelle zu gewährleisten.

Weitere spannende Blogposts

Supreme Federal Courts on Mastodon

Supreme Federal Courts on Mastodon
2. March 2023

Since yesterday, the offerings of the Federal Court of Justice, the Federal Administrative Court, the Federal Fiscal Court, the Federal...

Read moreDetails

Fortnite to blame for divorces?

Fortnite to blame for divorces?
7. November 2022

According to the portal "Divorce Online", Fortnite from Epic Games is said to be responsible for around 200 registered divorces...

Read moreDetails

Insults through emoji?

Insults through emoji?
7. November 2022

My office is as digital as it gets, I am fully digitally accessible and overwhelmingly my clients are dealing with...

Read moreDetails

Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court: Liability for falsified e-mails with invoices

E-invoicing obligation from 2025: BMF specifies requirements
5. February 2025

Recently, I have been working on a large number of cases involving hacked email servers and relevant financial amounts. Invoices...

Read moreDetails

Terms and Conditions and Prohibited Clauses

Terms and Conditions and Prohibited Clauses
1. March 2019

Prohibited clauses in player contracts of esport teams A few days ago, I reported how many types of contracts are...

Read moreDetails

The MiCAR regulation is coming

744528b528e546596171b3d29c620a26
26. June 2024

The new EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on June...

Read moreDetails

NIS2 compliance 2025: relevance for SaaS and media start-ups

Risks when using and offering no-code platforms as SaaS
2. May 2025

Why another contribution to the NIS2 Directive? Do we really need a separate blog post on the NIS2 Directive in...

Read moreDetails

Single letters as trademarks

Check24 may no longer list HUK Coburg without prices
24. September 2024

Individual letters as trademarks - protection with restrictions In principle, individual letters can be registered and protected as trademarks. However,...

Read moreDetails

Contracts with voice actors, streamers and test players – legal guidelines in games law

Contracts with voice actors, streamers and test players – legal guidelines in games law
10. April 2025

The development and marketing of modern video games is hardly conceivable without cooperation with external partners. Whether voice actors, streamers...

Read moreDetails
Enrichment law / condiction

Enrichment law / condiction

16. October 2024

Definition and legal basis: Enrichment law is a sub-area of the law of obligations and regulates the reversal of unjustified...

Read moreDetails
Legal framework for crowd-sensing projects: Data protection and remuneration models for participatory sensor networks

Kündigung

24. June 2023
Störerhaftung

Störerhaftung

27. June 2023
Howey test

Howey test

30. June 2023
lawyers are advising clients about real estate law 2021 08 27 09 31 04 utc

Bundesurlaubsgesetz (BUrlG)

10. November 2024

Podcast Folgen

8315f1ef298eb54dfeed2f5e55c8b9da 1

First test episode of the ITMediaLaw Podcast

26. August 2024

First test episodeDear readers, I am delighted to present the first test run of our brand new IT Media Law...

4f3597d5481e0f38e37bf80eaad208c7

The IT Media Law Podcast. Episode No. 1: What is this actually about?

26. August 2024

Yeah, the first real episode with myself! In this podcast, we dive into the exciting world of IT law and...

d5ab3414c7c4a7a5040c3c3c60451c44

The metaverse – legal challenges in virtual worlds

26. September 2024

In this fascinating episode, we dive deep into the legal aspects of the metaverse. As a lawyer and tech enthusiast,...

7c0b449a651fe0b81e5eec2e23515012 2

Copyright in the digital age

15. January 2025

This insightful 20-minute podcast episode by and with me explores the complex topic of copyright in the digital age. The...

  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • Contact
  • About lawyer Marian Härtel
Marian Härtel, Rathenaustr. 58a, 14612 Falkensee, info@itmedialaw.com

Marian Härtel - Rechtsanwalt für IT-Recht, Medienrecht und Startups, mit einem Fokus auf innovative Geschäftsmodelle, Games, KI und Finanzierungsberatung.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
  • Informationen
    • Ideal partner
    • About lawyer Marian Härtel
    • Quick and flexible access
    • Principles as a lawyer
    • Why a lawyer and business consultant?
    • Focus areas of attorney Marian Härtel
      • Focus on start-ups
      • Investment advice
      • Corporate law
      • Cryptocurrencies, Blockchain and Games
      • AI and SaaS
      • Streamers and influencers
      • Games and esports law
      • IT/IP Law
      • Law firm for GMBH,UG, GbR
      • Law firm for IT/IP and media law
    • The everyday life of an IT lawyer
    • How can I help clients?
    • Testimonials
    • Team: Saskia Härtel – WHO AM I?
    • Agile and lean law firm
    • Price overview
    • Various information
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Imprint
  • Services
    • Support and advice of agencies
    • Contract review and preparation
    • Games law consulting
    • Consulting for influencers and streamers
    • Advice in e-commerce
    • DLT and Blockchain consulting
    • Legal advice in corporate law: from incorporation to structuring
    • Legal compliance and expert opinions
    • Outsourcing – for companies or law firms
    • Booking as speaker
  • News
    • Gloss / Opinion
    • Law on the Internet
    • Online retail
    • Law and computer games
    • Law and Esport
    • Blockchain and web law
    • Data protection Law
    • Copyright
    • Labour law
    • Competition law
    • Corporate
    • EU law
    • Law on the protection of minors
    • Tax
    • Other
    • Internally
  • Podcast
    • ITMediaLaw Podcast
  • Knowledge base
  • Videos
    • Information videos – about Marian Härtel
    • Videos – about me (Couch)
    • Blogpost – individual videos
    • Videos on services
    • Shorts
    • Podcast format
    • Third-party videos
    • Other videos
  • Contact
  • en English
  • de Deutsch
Kostenlose Kurzberatung