Source: https://www.pbip.com/news/119-online-sharing-platforms-such-as-the-pirate-bay-communicate-copyright-protected-works-to-the-public
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 20:47:31+00:00

Document:
In its decision in Stichting Brein v Ziggo BV & X4ALL Internet BV (Case C-610/15) the CJEU has ruled that the operators of the online sharing platform ‘The Pirate Bay’ communicate works to the public by making available, indexing and managing content which infringes copyright. As a result, rightholders may apply for an injunction against intermediaries (such as internet service providers) whose services are used to commit such infringement.
The case, which originates from the courts of the Netherlands, was brought by Stitching Brein – a Dutch foundation which safeguards the interests of copyright holders. It sought an order requiring internet service providers Ziggo BV (‘Ziggo’) and X4ALL Internet BV (‘X4ALL’) to block the domain names and IP addresses of the online sharing platform ‘The Pirate Bay’.
The Pirate Bay online sharing platform is an indexer of ‘BitTorrent’ files. Users need to download specific software called ‘BitTorrent Client’ (independent of The Pirate Bay) which allows for the creation of BitTorrent files and these files can then be uploaded onto online sharing platforms such as The Pirate Bay. The Pirate Bay indexes the files (which mainly relate to unauthorised copyright-protected works) so that they can easily be found and downloaded by other users.
1. Is there a communication to the public by the operator of a website, if no protected works are available on that website, but a system exists by means of which protected works are indexed and categorised for users, so that users can trace and upload and download the protected works?
2. Is there scope for obtaining an injunction against an intermediary if that intermediary facilitates the infringing acts of third parties in the way outlined above?
Is there a communication to the public?
The CJEU cited previous case law, including Stichting Brein, C 527/15 and Svensson C‑466/12, and confirmed that the concept of a communication to the public involves two-fold criteria; (1) an act of communication; and (2) communication of that work to a ‘public’.
The court held that copyright protected works were, by means of The Pirate Bay online sharing platform, made available to users of that platform in such a way that they may access those works from wherever and whenever they individually choose. It was noted that the works made available to users were placed online not by the operators of the site but by its users. However, it was held that those operators, by making available and managing the online sharing platform, intervene with full knowledge of the consequences of their conduct, to provide access to protected works, by indexing torrent files on that platform which allows users to locate those works and share them as part of a peer-to-peer network. The operators are therefore plating an essential role in communicating the works, which were available to a large number of subscribers of Ziggo and X4ALL. The CJEU held that the works were therefore communicated to a public by the operators of The Pirate Bay.
Following Svensson, if a communication has been made by the same technical means as the initial communication, it also needs to be considered whether the communication has been made to a ‘new public. (that is to say a public that was not already taken into account by the rightholder when they authorised the initial communication). The CJEU pointed to the fact that The Pirate Bay had been informed that their platform provided access to unauthorised works. Furthermore, the operators of the Pirate Bay website expressly displayed on blogs and forums that their purpose was to make protected works available to the users, and encourage users to make copies of those works. The CJEU therefore concluded that it was clear that The Pirate Bay’s communications reached a new public and infringement under Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/029/EC may be established.
It was also deemed relevant that the operators of The Pirate Bay online sharing platform had generated considerable advertising revenues from their infringing activities.
Previous UK copyright cases concerning Torrent sharing platforms, such as The Pirate Bay, have tended to focus on infringement by the operators of these sites authorising primary infringements by their users. However, the CJEU appears to have clarified that the operators of Torrent platforms may communicate works to the public themselves and such a decision is likely to be welcomed by rightsholders.

References: CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU