Hyperlinking at one’s own risk – CJEU in GS Media / Sanoma

By Joran Spauwen and Jens van den Brink[1]

The GS Media decision[2] of 8 September 2016 is the latest chapter in the case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) on hyperlinking and copyright. Some consider it a questionable outcome with drastic restrictions on the freedom to link, and consequently of the freedom of information. Others feel the GS Media decision is merely a logical consequence of CJEU’s previous case law on the copyright holder’s exclusive right to ‘communicate his work to the public’. In any event, the decision has caused quite a stir, which may in part be due to the racy facts underlying this …read more

Top rankings for media team Kennedy Van der Laan

The two most authoritative legal rankings for lawyers have recently been published: Chambers and Legal 500. The Kennedy Van der Laan media team has again been awarded top rankings in both guides in the category media and entertainment (see Chambers and Legal 500).

Jens van den Brink is mentioned as ’notable practitioner’ in the Chambers ranking: “Jens van den Brink has been especially active recently in handling defamation and copyright disputes for broadcasters and newspapers. Clients say he is “very good, he knows what he is talking about and he always reacts very promptly.” He advised UPC Nederland on a dispute in which a German rights holder organisation was seeking to disclose the identity of UPC subscribers who had exchanged pirated movies.” Legal500 …read more

Dutch court (II): Google Spain Ruling Not Meant to Suppress News Reporting

In the fall of 2014 the Amsterdam Court was offered a chance to shed light on the interpretation of the Google Spain (Costeja) decision of the European Court of Justice, which created a ‘right to be forgotten’. The court then ruled that Google was right to refuse to remove links to refused a convicted criminal to profit from this judgment. To our knowledge, this was the first decision in its kind. Last week, the Amsterdam court ruled on yet another request to be forgotten. It again found in favour of Google and this time decided that the right of removal is not meant to …read more