natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In that respect, the State’s duties of protection are not so far-reaching that unlimited means should be made available to the rightholder for the purpose of detecting infringements of rights.
V tem smislu varstvena dolžnost države ni tako velika, da bi moral imeti imetnik pravice na razpolago neomejena sredstva za razjasnitev pravnih kr�itev.
Rather, it is not objectionable for certain rights of detection
Nasprotno ni mogoče grajati, če določene pravice za razja-
62 — Eur Court HR judgment of 12 July 2005 (Applications Nos. 41138/98 and 64320/01, § 118 et seq.).
62 — Sodba ESČP z dne 12. julija 2005 (pritožbi 41138/98 in 64320/01, člen 118 in naslednji).
Even if Directive 2006/24 were applicable, it would not allow direct communication of personal traffic data to Promusicae.
Čeprav bi bila Direktiva 2006/24 uporabna, ne bi omogočala neposrednega sporočanja osebnih podatkov o prometu Promusicae.
Under Article 1, retention is solely for the purpose of the investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime.
V skladu s členom 1 je namen hrambe le preiskovanje, odkrivanje in pregon hudih kaznivih dejanj.
Accordingly, pursuant to Article 4, those data may be provided only to the competent authorities.
Temu ustrezno se lahko v skladu s členom 4 ti podatki zagotovijo samo pristojnim organom.
If anything at all can be inferred from Directive 2006/24 with respect to the present case, it is the value judgment of the Community legislature that up to now only serious crime has necessitated Community-wide retention of traffic data and their use.
Če je v zvezi z obravnavanim primerom sploh mogoče o čem sklepati iz Direktive 2006/24, je to razvrstitev vrednot s strani zakonodajalca Skupnosti, ki zaenkrat le pri hudi kriminaliteti zahteva shranjevanje podatkov o prometu in njihovo obdelavo na vsem območju Skupnosti.
an amendment of the provisions on data protection.
bi to predpostavljalo spremembo določb o varstvu podatkov.
Up to now, however, the legislature has not yet taken that step.
Zakonodajalec pa do sedaj tega koraka �e ni naredil.
On the contrary, in adopting Directives 2000/31, 2001/29 and 2004/48, it provided for the unaltered continued applicability of data protection and saw no reason, when adopting the sector-specific Directives 2002/58 and 2006/24, to introduce restrictions of data protection in favour of the protection of intellectual property.
Nasprotno je pri sprejetju direktiv 2000/31, 2001/29 in 2004/48 predvidel neokrnjeno nadaljnjo uporabo varstva podatkov ter tudi pri sprejetju direktiv 2002/58 in 2006/24, ki sta specifični za to področje, ni videl povoda za to, da bi določil omejitve varstva podatkov v korist varstva intelektualne lastnine.
Conclusion with regard to data protection
Sklep glede varstva podatkov
Consequently, in the light of Directive 2002/58, it is compatible with Community law, in particular Directive 2000/31, Directive 2001/29 and Directive 2004/48, for Member States to exclude the communication of personal traffic data for the purpose of bringing civil proceedings against copyright infringements.
Torej je v okviru Direktive 2002/58 in prava Skupnosti, zlasti z Direktivo 2000/31, Direktivo 2001/29 in Direktivo 2004/48, skladno, če države članice izključijo sporočanje osebnih podatkov o prometu za civilnopravni pregon kr�itev avtorskih pravic.
Directive 2006/24 could, on the contrary, lead to a strengthening of data protection under Community law with regard to disputes concerning infringements of copyright.
Nasprotno bi Direktiva 2006/24 lahko povzročila, da bi se pri sporih zaradi kr�itev avtorskih pravic okrepilo skupnostnopravno varstvo podatkov.
The question then arises, even in criminal investigations, as to the extent to which it is compatible with the fundamental right to data protection under Community law to grant aggrieved rightholders access to the results of the investigation if the latter are based on the evaluation of retained traffic data within the meaning of Directive 2006/24.
Celo v kazenskopravnem preiskovalnem postopku se potem namreč zastavlja vpra�anje, koliko je s skupnostnopravno temeljno pravico do varstva podatkov skladno, da se o�kodovanim imetnikom pravic dovoli vpogled v rezultate preiskave, če ti temeljijo na vrednotenju shranjenih podatkov o prometu v smislu Direkti ve 2006/24.
Up to now that question is not affected by Community law since the Data Protection Directives do not apply to the prosecution of criminal offences. 63
Zaenkrat se pravo Skupnosti tega vpra�anja ne dotika, saj direktive o varstvu podatkov ne veljajo za kazenski pregon. 63
63 — See Parliament v Council and Commission, cited in footnote 54, paragraph 58.
63 — Glej v opombi 54 navedeno sodbo Parlament proti Svetu in Parlament proti Komisiji, točka 58.
Should the Community consider that more far-reaching protection of the holders of copyrights is necessary, that would require
Če bo Skupnost ocenila, da je potrebno večje varstvo imetnikov avtorskih pravic,
I therefore propose that the Court should reply to the request for a preliminary ruling as follows:
Zato Sodi�ču predlagam, naj na vpra�anje za predhodno odločanje odgovori tako:
‘It is compatible with Community law for Member States to exclude the commu- nication of personal traffic data for the purpose of bringing civil proceedings against copyright infringements.’
S pravom Skupnosti je skladno, če države članice izključijo sporočanje osebnih podatkov o prometu za uvedbo civilnopravnega postopka zaradi kr�itev avtorskih pravic.
29 January 2008
SODBA SODIŠČA (veliki senat) z dne 29. januarja 2008*
REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC by the Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 5 de Madrid (Spain), made by decision of 13 June 2006, received at the
V zadevi C-275/06, katere predmet je predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe na podlagi člena 234 ES, ki ga je vložilo Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 5 de Madrid (Španija) z odločbo z dne 13. junija 2006, ki je prispela na Sodi�če 26. junija 2006, v postopku
JUDGMENT OF 29. 1.
SODBA Z DNE 29. 1.
Advocate General: J. Kokott, Registrar: M. Ferreira, Principal Administrator, having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 5 June 2007, after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
Ferreira, glavna administratorka, na podlagi pisnega postopka in obravnave z dne 5. junija 2007, ob upo�tevanju stali�č, ki so jih predložili:
This reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p.
Predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe se nana�a na razlago Direktive 2000/31/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 8. junija 2000 o nekaterih pravnih vidikih storitev informacijske družbe, zlasti elektronskega poslovanja na notranjem trgu (Direktiva o elektronskem poslovanju) (UL L 178, str.
1), 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 (OJ 2001 L 167, p.
1), Direktive 2001/29/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 22. maja 2001 o usklajevanju določenih vidikov avtorske in sorodnih pravic v informacijski družbi (UL L 167, str.
10), Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (OJ 2004 L 157, p.
10), in Direk -ti ve 2004/48/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 29. aprila 2004 o uveljavljanju pravic intelektualne lastnine (UL L 157, str. 45, in popravek v UL 2004, L 195, str.
16), and Articles 17(2) and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union proclaimed in Nice on 7 December 2000 (OJ 2000 C 364, p.
16) ter členov 17(2) in 47 Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah, razgla�ene 7. decembra 2000 v Nici (UL C 364, str.
1, ‘the Charter’).
1, v nadaljevanju: Listina).
2008 — CASE C-275/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-275/06
The reference was made in the course of proceedings between Productores de Música de España (Promusicae) (‘Promusicae’), a non-profit-making organisation, and Telefónica de España SAU (‘Telefónica’) concerning Telefónica’s refusal to disclose to Promusicae, acting on behalf of its members who are holders of intellectual property rights, personal data relating to use of the internet by means of connections provided by Telefónica.
Ta predlog je bil predstavljen v okviru spora med neprofitnim združenjem Productores de Música de España (Promusicae) (v nadaljevanju: Promusicae) in družbo Telefónica de España SAU (v nadaljevanju: Telefónica), ker slednja Promusicae, ki deluje za račun imetnikov pravic intelektualne lastnine, zbranih v tem združenju, ni razkrila osebnih podatkov glede uporabe interneta po povezavah, ki jih nudi Telefónica.
International law
Mednarodno pravo
Part III of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (‘the TRIPs Agreement’), which constitutes Annex 1C to the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation (‘the WTO’), signed at Marrakesh on 15 April 1994 and approved by Council Decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994 concerning the conclusion on behalf of the European Community, as regards matters within its competence, of the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round multilateral negotiations (1986-1994) (OJ 1994 L 336, p.
Del III Sporazuma o trgovinskih vidikih pravic intelektualne lastnine (v nadaljevanju: Sporazum TRIPS), ki je Priloga 1C k Sporazumu o ustanovitvi Svetovne trgovinske organizacije (WTO), sklenjenem v Marake�u 15. aprila 1994 in potrjenem s Sklepom Sveta 94/800/ES z dne 22. decembra 1994 o sklenitvi sporazumov, doseženih v Urugvajskem krogu večstranskih pogajanj (1986–1994), v imenu Evropske skupnosti, v zvezi z zadevami, ki so v njeni pristojnosti (UL L 336, str.
1), is headed ‘Enforcement of intellectual property rights’.
1), ima naslov „Uveljavljanje pravic intelektualne lastnine“.
That part includes Article 41(1) and (2), according to which:
V tem delu je tudi člen 41(1) in (2), ki določa:
Members shall ensure that enforcement procedures as specified in this Part are available under their law so as to permit effective action against any act of infringement of intellectual property rights covered by this Agreement, including expeditious remedies to prevent infringements and remedies which constitute a deterrent
Članice zagotovijo, da so postopki uveljavljanja pravic, določeni v tem delu, v njihovih zakonih taki, da omogočajo učinkovito ukrepanje proti kateremu koli dejanju poseganja v pravice intelektualne lastnine, ki jih vsebuje ta sporazum,
PROMUSICAE to further infringements.
PROMUSICAE vključno s hitrimi sredstvi za preprečevanje poseganja in sredstvi, ki preprečujejo nadaljnja poseganja.
They shall not be unnecessarily complicated or costly, or entail unreasonable time-limits or unwarranted delays.’
Ne smejo biti po nepotrebnem zapleteni ali dragi ali postavljati nerazumne časovne omejitve ali povzročati neupravičene zamude.“
In Section 2 of Part III, ‘Civil and administrative procedures and remedies’, Article 42, headed ‘Fair and Equitable Procedures’, provides:
V poglavju 2 navedenega dela III, naslovljenem „Civilni in upravni postopki ter sredstva“, člen 42, ki nosi naslov „Pravični in enaki postopki“, določa:
‘Members shall make available to right holders civil judicial procedures concerning the enforcement of any intellectual property right covered by this Agreement …’
„Članice omogočajo imetnikom pravic v zvezi z uveljavljanjem vsake pravice intelektualne lastnine po tem sporazumu civilne sodne postopke […].“
Article 47 of the TRIPs Agreement, headed ‘Right of Information’, provides:
Člen 47 Sporazuma TRIPS, naslovljen „Pravica do obvestila“, določa:
‘Members may provide that the judicial authorities shall have the authority, unless this would be out of proportion to the seriousness of the infringement, to order the infringer to inform the right holder of the identity of third persons involved in the production and distribution of the infringing goods or services and of their channels of distribution.’
„Članice lahko določijo, razen če je to v nesorazmerju s težo kr�itve, da imajo sodne oblasti pravico odrediti, da kr�ilec imetnika pravice obvesti o istovetnosti tretjih oseb, ki so vpletene v proizvodnjo in promet blaga ali storitev, ki je predmet kr�itve, in o njihovih poslovnih zvezah.“
Community law
Pravo skupnosti
Provisions relating to the information society and the protection of intellectual property, especially copyright
Predpisi v zvezi z informacijsko družbo in varstvom intelektualne lastnine, zlasti avtorske pravice
Article 1 of Directive 2000/31 states:
Člen 1 Direktive 2000/31 določa:
This Directive seeks to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market by ensuring the free movement of information society services between the Member States.
Cilj te direktive je prispevati k pravilnemu delovanju notranjega trga z zagotavljanjem prostega pretoka storitev informacijske družbe med državami članicami.
This Directive approximates, to the extent necessary for the achievement of the objective set out in paragraph 1, certain national provisions on information society services relating to the internal market, the establishment of service providers, commercial communications, electronic contracts, the liability of intermediaries, codes of conduct, out-of-court dispute settlements, court actions and cooperation between Member States.
Ta direktiva usklajuje, kolikor je to potrebno za dosego ciljev iz odstavka 1, nekatere nacionalne določbe o storitvah informacijske družbe glede notranjega trga, sedeža ponudnikov storitev, komercialnih sporočil, elektronskih pogodb, odgovornosti posrednikov, kodeksov ravnanja, izvensodnih poravnav sporov, sodnega varstva in sodelovanja med državami članicami.
This Directive complements Community law applicable to information society services without prejudice to the level of protection for, in particular, public health
Ta direktiva dopolnjuje pravo Skupnosti, ki se uporablja za storitve informacijske družbe, in ne posega v stopnjo varstva, �e posebno ne javnega zdravja in varstva
PROMUSICAE and consumer interests, as established by Community acts and national legislation implementing them in so far as this does not restrict the freedom to provide information society services.
PROMUSICAE interesov potro�nikov, kakor izhaja iz pravnih aktov Skupnosti in nacionalne zakonodaje za njihovo izvajanje, če to ne omejuje svobode zagotavljanja storitev informacijske družbe.
(b) questions relating to information society services covered by Directives 95/46/EC and 97/66/EC;
(b) vpra�anja v zvezi s storitvami informacijske družbe, ki jih zajemata direktivi 95/46/ES in 97/66/ES;
According to Article 15 of Directive 2000/31:
V skladu s členom 15 Direktive 2000/31 velja:
Member States shall not impose a general obligation on providers, when providing the services covered by Articles 12, 13 and 14, to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity.
Države članice ponudnikom glede opravljanja storitev iz členov 12, 13 in 14 ne predpi�ejo splo�ne obveznosti za nadzor podatkov pri njihovem prenosu ali shranjevanju, pa tudi ne za dejavno raziskovanje okoli�čin, na podlagi katerih se domneva, da gre za nezakonito dejavnost.
Member States may establish obligations for information society service providers promptly to inform the competent public authorities of alleged illegal activities undertaken or information provided by recipients of their service or obligations to communicate to the competent authorities, at their request, information enabling the identification of recipients of their service with whom they have storage agreements.’
Države članice lahko določijo, da morajo ponudniki storitev informacijske družbe nemudoma obvestiti pristojne organe o domnevnih nezakonitih dejavnostih ali podatkih prejemnikov njihove storitve ali da morajo pristojnim organom na zahtevo sporočiti podatke, na podlagi katerih je možno identificirati prejemnike njihove storitve, s katerimi so sklenili dogovore o shranjevanju.“
Article 18 of Directive 2000/31 provides:
Člen 18 Direktive 2000/31 določa:
Member States shall ensure that court actions available under national law concerning information society services’ activities allow for the rapid adoption of measures, including interim measures, designed to terminate any alleged infringement and to prevent any further impairment of the interests involved.
Države članice zagotovijo, da sodno varstvo, ki ga predvideva nacionalno pravo glede dejavnosti storitev informacijske družbe, omogoča hitro sprejetje ukrepov, vključno z začasnimi ukrepi, namenjenimi ustavitvi domnevne kr�itve in preprečitvi nadaljnjega o�kodovanja zadevnih interesov.
According to Article 1(1) of Directive 2001/29, the directive concerns the legal protection of copyright and related rights in the framework of the internal market, with particular emphasis on the information society.
Glede na člen 1(1) Direktive 2001/29 ureja ta direktiva pravno varstvo avtorske in sorodnih pravic v okviru notranjega trga s posebnim poudarkom na informacijski družbi.
Under Article 8 of Directive 2001/29:
V skladu s členom 8 Direktive 2001/29 velja:
Member States shall provide appropriate sanctions and remedies in respect of infringements of the rights and obligations set out in this Directive and shall take all the measures necessary to ensure that those sanctions and remedies are applied.
Države članice predvidijo ustrezne sankcije in pravna sredstva v zvezi s kr�itvami pravic in obveznosti, ki jih določa ta direktiva, in sprejmejo vse potrebne ukrepe za zagotovitev, da se [te] sankcije in pravna sredstva uporabljajo.
Member States shall ensure that rightholders are in a position to apply for an injunction against intermediaries whose services are used by a third party to infringe a copyright or related right.’
Države članice zagotovijo, da imetniki pravic lahko zahtevajo sodno odredbo proti posrednikom, katerih storitve uporablja tretja stranka in s tem kr�i avtorske ali sorodne pravice.“
Article 9 of Directive 2001/29 reads:
Člen 9 Direktive 2001/29 določa:
‘This Directive shall be without prejudice to provisions concerning in particular patent rights, trade marks, design rights, utility models, topographies of semiconductor products, type faces, conditional access, access to cable of broadcasting
„Ta direktiva ne vpliva na predpise, ki zadevajo zlasti patentne pravice, blagovne znamke, pravice iz modela, patenta s skraj�anim trajanjem, topografijo polprevodni�kih izdelkov, tipov pisav, pogojni dostop, dostop do kabla, za�čito narodnih
Article 1 of Directive 2004/48 states:
Člen 1 Direktive 2004/48 določa:
‘This Directive concerns the measures, procedures and remedies necessary to ensure the enforcement of intellectual property rights …’
„Ta direktiva se nana�a na ukrepe, postopke in pravna sredstva, ki so potrebna za zagotovitev uveljavitve pravic intelektualne lastnine. […]“
According to Article 2(3) of Directive 2004/48:
V skladu s členom 2 Direktive 2004/48 velja:
(a) the Community provisions governing the substantive law on intellectual property, Directive 95/46/EC, Directive 1999/93/EC or Directive 2000/31/EC, in general, and Articles 12 to 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC in particular;
(a) določbe Skupnosti, ki urejajo materialno pravo intelektualne lastnine, Direk -tivo 95/46/ES, Direktivo 1999/93/ES ali Direktivo 2000/31/ES na splo�no in zlasti na člene [od] 12 do 15 Direktive 2000/31/ES;
(b) Member States’ international obligations and notably the TRIPS Agreement, including those relating to criminal procedures and penalties;
(b) mednarodne obveznosti držav članic in predvsem na Sporazum TRIPS, vključno s tistimi, ki se nana�ajo na kazenske postopke in kazni;
(c) any national provisions in Member States relating to criminal procedures or penalties in respect of infringement of intellectual property rights.’
(c) nacionalne določbe držav članic v zvezi s kazenskimi postopki ali kaznimi v zvezi s kr�itvami pravic intelektualne lastnine.“
Article 3 of Directive 2004/48 provides:
Člen 3 Direktive 2004/48 določa:
Member States shall provide for the measures, procedures and remedies necessary to ensure the enforcement of the intellectual property rights covered by this Directive.
Države članice predvidijo ukrepe, postopke in pravna sredstva, potrebne za zagotovitev uveljavitve pravic intelektualne lastnine, ki jih zajema ta direktiva.
Those measures, procedures and remedies shall be fair and equitable and shall not be unnecessarily complicated or costly, or entail unreasonable time-limits or unwarranted delays.
Ti ukrepi, postopki in pravna sredstva so po�teni in pravični in niso po nepotrebnem zapleteni ali dragi in ne vsebujejo nerazumnih časovnih rokov ali neupravičenih zamud.
Those measures, procedures and remedies shall also be effective, proportionate and dissuasive and shall be applied in such a manner as to avoid the creation of barriers to legitimate trade and to provide for safeguards against their abuse.’
Ti ukrepi, postopki in pravna sredstva so tudi dejanski, sorazmerni in odvračilni in se uporabljajo na tak način, da se izogibajo ustvarjanju ovir za zakonito trgovino in zagotavljajo za�čito pred zlorabo.“
Article 8 of Directive 2004/48 provides:
Člen 8 Direktive 2004/48 določa:
Member States shall ensure that, in the context of proceedings concerning an infringement of an intellectual property right and in response to a justified and
Države članice zagotovijo, da lahko v okviru postopkov v zvezi s kr�itvijo pravice intelektualne lastnine in na podlagi utemeljene in sorazmerne zahteve vlagatelja
2008 — CASE C-275/06 proportionate request of the claimant, the competent judicial authorities may order that information on the origin and distribution networks of the goods or services which infringe an intellectual property right be provided by the infringer and/or any other person who:
2008 – ZADEVA C-275/06 pristojni sodni organi odredijo, da informacije o izvoru in distribucijskih omrežjih blaga ali storitev, ki kr�ijo pravico intelektualne lastnine, priskrbi kr�itelj in/ali katera koli druga oseba, za katero se ugotovi, da:
(b) was found to be using the infringing services on a commercial scale;
(b) uporablja v komercialnem obsegu storitve, ki so predmet kr�itve;
(c) was found to be providing on a commercial scale services used in infringing activities; or
(c) zagotavlja v komercialnem obsegu storitve, uporabljene v dejavnostih, ki so predmet kr�itve; ali
(d) was indicated by the person referred to in point (a), (b) or (c) as being involved in the production, manufacture or distribution of the goods or the provision of the services.
(d) za katero je oseba iz točke (a), (b) ali (c) navedla, da je bila vpletena v proizvodnjo, izdelavo ali distribucijo blaga ali opravljanje storitev.
(a) the names and addresses of the producers, manufacturers, distributors, suppliers and other previous holders of the goods or services, as well as the intended wholesalers and retailers;
(a) imena in naslove proizvajalcev, izdelovalcev, distributerjev, dobaviteljev in drugih prej�njih imetnikov blaga ali storitev, kakor tudi predvidenih trgovcev na debelo in na drobno;
(b) information on the quantities produced, manufactured, delivered, received or ordered, as well as the price obtained for the goods or services in question.
(b) informacije o proizvedenih, izdelanih, dostavljenih, prejetih ali naročenih količinah, pa tudi o cenah, doseženih za zadevno blago ali storitve.
Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall apply without prejudice to other statutory provisions which:
Odstavka 1 in 2 se uporabljata brez poseganja v druge zakonske določbe, ki:
(a) grant the rightholder rights to receive fuller information;
(a) dodeljujejo imetniku pravice pravico do prejemanja celovitej�ih informacij;
(b) govern the use in civil or criminal proceedings of the information communicated pursuant to this Article;
(b) urejajo uporabo informacij, ki se sporočajo na podlagi tega člena, v civilnih in kazenskih postopkih;