6 ms·
That's not what that article says. According to that article, that decision was based on the idea that a hyperlink cannot infringe copyright, not on implied con
by leereeves 7y ago
That's not what that article says. According to that article, that decision was based on the idea that a hyperlink cannot infringe copyright, not on implied consent:
> The court in Karlsruhe does not regard the display of the preview images as an act of making available a copyright work in the sense of the copyright law. ... Since the decision handed down in the “Svensson” case in 2014, it is common ground that, in principle, the use of a hyperlink is not a copyright-relevant act.
- judge2020 7y agoMy bad - I was looking at a published book that referenced the case and wanted to link an article that was more easily available, but it was for the wrong case. My original comment is also uneditable now. The case I meant to reference is "Vorschaubilder I", see the press release[0] > [translated] The plaintiff has made the content of its website accessible for search engines without making use of technical means to exclude the images of her works from the search and display by image search engines in the form of preview images. 0: http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=Aktuell&anz=1&pos=0&nr=51777&linked=pm&Blank=1 http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/doc...