As the ECJ points out, where the cloud is of a вЂњdual functionality,вЂќ i.e., where the content is not only stored in the cloud for the uploading user but also made available to the public (e.g., to registered users of the platform), this constitutes a separate relevant act under copyright law. This relief only applies where the reproductions made by cloud users actually serve private purposes only. In accordance with an earlier judgment from 2015 (CвЂ‘463/12 вЂ“ Copydan BГҐndkopi), the ECJ further underlines that the fact that the storage space made available to the user on a server belongs to a third party (i.e., to Strato and not the reproducing user) is not decisive in this regard.ДЄs a result, cloud service providers are not at risk for being held indirectly liable for copyright infringing reproductions made by their users. In particular, the court expressly refers to the need for the current law to adapt in order to correspond to technological developments as well as to the principle of technological neutrality, which the court has highlighted in a number of previous judgements. The relevant sticking point is the provisionвЂ™s term of reproductions on вЂњ any medium.вЂќ As the legal text does not give any interpretation or limitations as to what devices deployed by the user might be covered by this term, the ECJ opts for a broad interpretation of this concept. In detail: Private copies stored in a cloud fall under the EU private copying exceptionДЇirstly, the ECJ finds that the private copying exception of Article 5 subsec.Дў b) InfoSoc-Directive does in fact cover the saving of copies of works for private purposes in a cloud storage space.

The ECJвЂ™s ruling sheds light on two questions: whether private copies stored in a cloud fall under the EU private copying exception (they do) and whether cloud storage providers have to pay levies for such copies (they might). The ECJвЂ™s judgment in Austro-Mechana (March 24, 2022, C-433/20) Accordingly, the court referred to the ECJ for clarification on this matter. Upon appeal, the Higher Regional Court of Vienna acknowledged that, under ECJ case law, it was not clear whether the storage of content via cloud computing falls under the scope of the InfoSoc-DirectiveвЂ™s private copying exception. The Commercial Court Vienna dismissed Austro-MechanaвЂ™s motion, outlining that Strato does not make вЂњstorage mediaвЂќ available to its customers, but rather provides them with an online storage service. In addition, Strato argued, its Austrian users had already paid a levy as part of the price for the devices (e.g., mobile phones, PC, tablets) used for uploading content to StratoвЂ™s cloud. Strato further argued that it had already indirectly paid such a levy when buying its servers in Germany as a component the price charged by the manufacturer/importer of these servers. Strato contested Austro-MechanaвЂ™s request, arguing that the levy only applies to physical вЂњstorage mediaвЂќ but not cloud storage services. Under Austrian copyright law, вЂњ to place the storage media or reproduction device on the marketвЂќ is the relevant act to which the Austrian private copy levy applies (Sect. The Austrian copyright collecting society Austro-Mechana had applied to the Commercial Court of Vienna for an order, seeking payment of private copying levies from вЂњStrato,вЂќ the provider of a cloud storage service called вЂњHiDrive.вЂќ While Strato has its seat and servers in Germany, it also offers its storage services to persons in Austria. The case at hand: German cloud service provider and Austrian customers Details of the compensation scheme fall under the broad discretion of the Member States.ДЄ potential levy obligation for cloud service providers therefore needs to be determined based on an EU country-by-country basis and depends on the wording of the current national private copying exceptions in each Member State.

that Member States must provide for a fair compensation to right holders for the potential harm suffered by such permitted reproductions of their works, which can, but does not have to determine the cloud service provider as the debtor for such copyright levy.that the private copying exception is not limited to physical means, but also applies to private copies of works stored in a cloud and.

With the Austro-Mechana judgement, the ECJ has now clarified:.Private copies, therefore, do not require the prior approval by the rights-holder. EU copyright law allows for an exception to the reproduction right for copies made for private use, which has long been implemented into national laws by all Member States.The recent ruling of the European Court of Justice ( ECJ) in Austro-Mechana (March 24, 2022, C-433/20) sheds light on two open questions: Whether private copies stored in a cloud fall under the EU private copying exception (they do) and whether cloud storage providers have to pay statutory levies for such copies (they might).

Strato hidrive online storage