3 ms·
And the actual judgment: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62024CJ0788 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62...
by derdi 3mo ago
And the actual judgment: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62024CJ0788 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62...
I find these are often very readable and interesting.
- yorwba 3mo agoIt seems like the article title was inspired by this sentence "By contrast, the provider of a VPN or similar services that are used in order to circumvent an ineffective geo-blocking measure and are lawful technical tools which users may legitimately use cannot be regarded as also having communicated the work to the public." I.e. if a VPN is a lawful technical tool, then the VPN provider isn't liable as the publisher of works accessible through it. That leaves open the possibility for VPNs that are not lawful or not mere technical tools to be liable.