Currently there is an interesting verdict from the OLG Celle regarding warnings and complaints in the field of file sharing. This concerns the transferability of so-called ‘factor jurisdiction’ to computer games, namely how much compensation can be claimed by means of the licence analogy.
In doing so, the OLG Celle has decided that the capping of the warning costs in accordance with Section 97a para. 3 Sentence 2 UrhG should be applied to typical file-sharing warnings and an exception to them would only be appropriate if, in accordance with Paragraph 97a(4). 3 Sentence 4 UrhG, the infringements take place in the context of the initial publication or there is a large-scale copyright infringement. Nor can I derive anything else from Article 14 of the Directive on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (2004/48/EC) – the Enforcement Directive.
This is somewhat at odds with the previous view of other courts, which have in principle rejected the cap on file sharing, because in typical cases the sharing of the files is always done to a completely unmanageable, large number of users.
The case law in the file-sharing sector remains exciting and varied. Who would have thought that.