German court rules: Filehosters like Rapidshare are responsible for copyright violati

[Kw3rLn]

Google translate it:

Link here

Interesting comment from the judge though when Rapidshare claimed they cant know if a user didnt just store the file as backup:

"It's called "Rapidshare" not "Rapidstore" - that says it all."

Kw3rLn Reviewed by Kw3rLn on 13th Jul 2012. German court rules: Filehosters like Rapidshare are responsible for copyright violati Google translate it: Link here Rating: 5

[JGM]

Translated version:

Rapidshare is liable under certain conditions, if copyrights are infringed on its platform. The decision of the Federal Court. Another court has now clarified in detail when and how to file hosting services have to tackle copyright infringement in the offer.

Karlsruhe - storage platforms such as Rapidshare can be held responsible for copyright infringement in retrieval of stored files. That the Federal Court ruled on Thursday. Requirement is that the company has been advised of similar violations and refrain reasonable steps to prevent new violations, has the Federal Court ruled in a judgment delivered on Thursday. The judge referred to a dispute between the file hoster Rapidshare and computer game company Atari back to the lower court. Previously, the Higher Regional Court D?sseldorf had dismissed the action against Rapidshare, because of the platform vendors have no unreasonable inspection duties.

The final judgment may have far reaching implications for other providers of online storage like Dropbox or Google. Rapidshare is like the type of service at a so-called file hosting services and has on its online platform space available. Users had set there, marketed by Atari computer game "Alone in the Dark" and spread the link so that others could download it. Atari's lawyer had argued the trial before the Supreme Court on Thursday, RapidShare can easily check whether files are saved with the game on the platform.

"Number of complaints has decreased"

The representative of the RapidShare responded that the company produces only the technical services of the storage and transfer of data. "How should the defendant be excluded that the user has created not just a backup?" This seemed to Supreme Court Judge Wolfgang Kirchhoff not convincing at first: "The service is now and not once Rapidshare Rapidshare doors - and that says it all."

Rapidshare-director Alexandra Zwingli Spiegel Online said in April 2012, how high is the percentage of illegal use on Rapidshare, they did not know. But: "... The number of complaints about illegal files dropped That's a good sign, I also follow what users post in forums warez pages on When is that Rapidshare has gone bad, I'm happy."

Rapidshare Megaupload is not equal

Rapidshare search already even after pirated copies. Referencing the company has developed a search engine claims to be, the relevant directories (so-called warez sites) to crawl to files on RapidShare servers, called a crawler. For this purpose, the company employed workers sift through the data and block illegal content. According Rapidshare Crawler is in the last two years of use.

The Supreme Court ruling follows a trend observed for years in the case law on the liability of online platforms: they are generally seen as a hosting provider and enjoy corresponding liability privileges, for example, are just becoming aware of specific violations of law responsible to remedy that. But courts also extend to platforms that go beyond pure web hosting, the last inspection duties as for example on YouTube.

The service MegaUpload, who had been operated by the German-born Kim dot aka Kim Schmitz, was closed in January after a raid on his estate in New Zealand. Megaupload also had offered online storage. The service was, at least according to the accusation of the U.S. Department of Justice, however, used for large-scale copyright infringement, with the knowledge, perhaps even the assistance of the operator. Similar allegations brought in a number of Interoute's peer service Kino.to, turned to the German-speaking users in prison. Even they themselves had taken care to upload copyright-protected files.

Another method is still in progress: vs. Gema. Rapidshare

In February 2012, the European Court of Justice ruled that the social network Netlog does not need to check before publication, if rejected by users uploaded videos against copyrights. The ECJ argued that such monitoring would violate the prohibition of a general monitoring obligation. In November 2011, the ECJ had already ruled that an ISP can not be obliged to implement filtering software to prevent the downloading of pirated copies.

Another, similar to stored procedures in connection with Rapidshare is still running: The Hanseatic Higher Regional Court, Hamburg Higher Regional Court upheld another ruling from the year 2008, therefore it is prohibited from Rapidshare, bringing several thousand specific pieces of music in circulation. Also wants to challenge this decision before the Supreme Court but Rapidshare.

JGM.