The limits of German jurisdiction in B2B claims against US social media services

In an exciting ruling, the Regional Court of Lübeck decided that German courts do not have jurisdiction over contractual disputes with an American social media service in a business context. This judgment (Ref.: 15 O 218/23) highlights the challenges facing international jurisdiction in the digital age.

The case: Business use versus consumer protection

In the specific case, a user who used her social media account for business purposes as a model took legal action against the restriction of her account by the service provider. The terms of use of the service stipulated that the courts at the registered office of the service provider – in the USA – had jurisdiction in the event of disputes. The Lübeck Regional Court declared that it did not have jurisdiction because the plaintiff was not acting as a consumer but in a business environment.

The plaintiff maintained two accounts on a social network, through which she shared content from her life and referred to her presence on another web service. This web service allowed users to charge money for viewing photos or videos. The woman used this platform to make a living and was therefore dependent on the reach of her social media accounts. After the company operating the social network deleted some of her posts and restricted their reach, the plaintiff unsuccessfully tried to reverse these measures and turned to the Lübeck Regional Court.

The court rejected their request to oblige the company to lift the range restriction and restore their contributions. It based its decision on the fact that the Lübeck Regional Court was not allowed to rule on the lawsuit, as the company was generally to be sued at its registered office in another EU country. Although there are exceptions to this principle, in particular for private users who are allowed to sue at their own place of residence, this did not apply in the plaintiff’s case, as she also operated her accounts commercially. The court was therefore unable to decide whether the company acted lawfully. This question is to be clarified at the court of the company’s registered office.

What legal issues arise?

The judgment of the Regional Court of Lübeck (case no. 15 O 218/23) brings to light interesting legal issues arising from the use of digital services in a business context. It raises the question of the extent to which aspects such as the Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) and other relevant legal frameworks are sufficiently taken into account in such cases. The court’s decision to consider the place of jurisdiction at the registered office of the service provider as decisive, especially in the case of commercial use, opens up a discussion on the application and scope of international legal standards in the digital world.

This situation underlines the need for companies and the self-employed to thoroughly examine not only the terms of use, but also the complex legal aspects associated with the use of international digital services. The fact that the ruling is not yet legally binding and the consideration of specific factors such as the design of the social media provider and the existence of an establishment in Europe show that the legal landscape in this area remains dynamic and characterized by uncertainty. This makes it all the more important for companies and the self-employed to keep up to date with the latest developments and possible legal implications of their online activities.

Conclusion

The ruling by the Lübeck Regional Court serves as a striking example of the complex interactions between globalization, digitalization and the law. It highlights how the cross-border nature of digital services raises new legal issues, particularly in the context of business use. This ruling makes it clear that a careful examination of international legal provisions is essential in order to minimize risks and make informed decisions.

In this constantly changing digital landscape, it is of the utmost importance for companies and the self-employed not only to understand the current legal framework, but also to act proactively. This can mean regularly reviewing and adapting your business practices to keep up with the latest legal developments. In addition, seeking specialized legal advice can help identify and navigate potential pitfalls, especially in cases where international legal norms and practices play a role.

Ultimately, the ruling shows that in the age of digitalization, a flexible and forward-looking legal approach is crucial for business success. It encourages companies and the self-employed to continuously deal with the dynamic legal aspects of the digital world and to adapt accordingly in order to operate successfully and compliantly in the long term.

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.