- The Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf has overturned the flying jurisdiction for legal issues on YouTube.
- A decision on Tuesday reduces the validity of the legal restriction in Section 14 (2) sentence 3 no. 1 UWG.
- The new interpretation also applies to advertising videos on YouTube and not just competition law infringements.
- The court at the place of residence of the publishing party must be chosen.
- The question of infringement is now irrelevant for determining jurisdiction.
- The decision shows the importance of local jurisdiction in internet cases.
- The change affects all forms of content published online.
A few days ago, I reported that the Düsseldorf Regional Court kept the flying jurisdiction for legal issues on YouTube alive(see this blog post). Now the OLG Düsseldorf has overturned this ruling and allows the jurisdiction to die again.
In fact, the OLG Düsseldorf ruled in a decision on Tuesday that the restriction of the flying jurisdiction in Sec. 14 para. 2 p. 3 no. 1 UWG (amended only in December of last year) should not be interpreted restrictively against the wording. According to the court, the restriction should not only apply to competition violations that require action in electronic commerce or via telemedia.
Thus, even for the publication of promotional videos on YouTube, the court would have to be chosen that has jurisdiction over the person who published or uploaded the video (for example, the registered office or place of residence). Thus, whether the publication of a video leads to a violation of the prohibition of misleading statements, for example, or whether the legal question is linked to the distribution channel, is now irrelevant for the determination of the court’s jurisdiction.
