
EU Courts; Playboy vs. GS Media: links to copyrighted work illegal if commercial - digitalengineer
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=183124&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=736696
======
digitalengineer
TLDR; Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of
copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as
meaning that, in order to establish whether the fact of posting, on a website,
hyperlinks to protected works, which are freely available on another website
without the consent of the copyright holder, constitutes a ‘communication to
the public’ within the meaning of that provision, it is to be determined
_whether those links are provided without the pursuit of financial gain_ by a
person who did not know or could not reasonably have known the illegal nature
of the publication of those works on that other website or whether, on the
contrary, those links are provided for such a purpose, a situation in which
that knowledge must be presumed.

~~~
celticninja
Seems like it would be difficult to defend to meet both criteria, if I post a
link to a picture on my blog, which carries no advertising and therefore there
is no financial gain am I still liable because I know we they were not there
with the copyright holders consent?

