Articles

Antwerp Commercial Court finds that Bhaalu cannot lawfully rely upon the “private copy” exception enshrined in the Belgian Copyright Act

Antwerp Commercial Court finds that Bhaalu cannot lawfully rely upon the “private copy” exception enshrined in the Belgian Copyright Act

Antwerp Commercial Court finds that Bhaalu cannot lawfully rely upon the “private copy” exception enshrined in the Belgian Copyright Act

17.12.2014

Right Brain Interface NV is a young technology company that has created a remote DVR (digital video recording) storage service called “Bhaalu”. In essence this service allows its subscribers to record the television programs they can watch according to their TV channels’ subscription and to store these programs on servers owned by the unincorporated association of Bhaalu users (“in the cloud”). This way, Bhaalu users can watch TV programs on demand up to 3 months after they have been aired.

This article was co-written by Valerie Vanryckeghem

This article was co-written by Valerie VanryckeghemThis system is also called “Collaborative Video Recorder” (or CVR) given that the users are basically sharing the cost of certain common components of the CVR hardware, without it being technically possible for them to share or transfer content with other users.

Naturally, Bhaalu’s entry on the Belgian market has led to a great deal of opposition by Belgian broadcasters. This has led Medialaan, VRT, and SBS Belgium to sue Right Brain Interface NV before the Commercial Court of Antwerp on grounds of their right to exclusive reproduction and communication enshrined in the Belgian Copyright Act.

The broadcasters asserted that Right Brain Interface NV should have obtained the broadcasters’ prior consent because they had an exclusive reproduction right. But Right Brain Interface NV invoked the “private copy”-exception provided by the Belgian Copyright Act on grounds that the user may only (i) use Bhaalu if he or she has subscribed to the particular channel, (ii) watch his or her own recorded programs, and (iii) watch his or her recorded programs within the “family circle”.

The Antwerp Court first concluded that it was indeed the Bhaalu user—and not Bhaalu itself—who makes a “private copy” in the sense of the “private copy”-exception under the Belgian Copyright Act.

Then the Court ascertained that the television signals originating from TV Vlaanderen and Telenet constituted the source of Bhaalu’s
recording capacity. These television signals needed to be decrypted and thus also copied in the Bhaalu datacenter in order for Bhaalu to be able to provide its CVR service to its users. However, Right Brain Interface NV did not obtain the prior consent from TV Vlaanderen and Telenet to decrypt these television signals.
Therefore, the Court ruled in favor of the broadcasters and declared that Right Brain Interface NV has infringed the broadcasters’ copyrights because it copies television signals from an illicit source and communicates the copied signals to the public, even if the users/subscribers would have lawfully received the broadcast through a television receiver. Finally, Right Brain Interface NV asserted that it merely provides the equipment for making the “private copy”, so it should not be categorized as a service provider. But the Court rejected Right Brain Interface NV’s argument. The Court found that Right Brain Interface NV’s activities in the Bhaalu system were inextricably linked to the infringing acts and that the Bhaalu devices could not function without the interventions of Right Brain Interface NV. Therefore, the Court ordered Right Brain Interface NV, as the intermediary whose services were used for such infringements, to cease its activities under penalty of a fine of EUR 1,000 per week and per user.


Click here to see a printable version of this article

All rights reserved. Care has been taken to ensure that the content of this e-bulletin is as accurate as possible. However the accuracy and completeness of the information in this e-bulletin, largely based upon third party sources, cannot be guaranteed. The materials contained in this e-bulletin have been prepared and provided by Stibbe for information purposes only. They do not constitute legal or other professional advice and readers should not act upon the information contained in this e-bulletin without consulting legal counsel. Consultation of this e-bulletin will not create an attorney-client relationship between Stibbe and the reader. The e-bulletin may be used only for personal use and all other uses are prohibited.

Team

Related news

17.05.2022 EU law
Digital Law Up(to)date: Art. 17 of directive 2019/790 is valid!

Articles - The CJEU validates the new liability regime for large online platforms organised by article 17 of the directive 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market. The action was brought by the Republic of Poland to annul a part of article 17 as it is contrary to the right to freedom of expression.

Read more

11.05.2022 NL law
De afweging van grondrechten in het kader van corona

Articles - COVID-19 heeft de maatschappij voor dilemma’s geplaatst bij de afweging van volksgezondheid en bescherming van kwetsbaren tegenover vrijheden van het individu. In Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsrecht in Context schetsen Frederiek Fernhout en Judica Krikke de onderliggende rechten en vrijheden die vastgelegd zijn in het Europese grondrechtenkader, de AVG en nationale arbeidswetgeving en bespreken zij hoe deze tegen elkaar moeten worden afgewogen in de context van coronamaatregelen.

Read more

26.04.2022 EU law
Digital Law Up(to)date: Further clarification by the CJEU on the retention of traffic and location electronic communications data for the purpose of combating serious crime

Articles - On 5 April 2022, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union first confirmed that EU law precludes national legislative measures which provide, as a preventative measure, for the general and indiscriminate retention of traffic and location data relating to electronic communications, for the purpose of combating serious crime.

Read more