Categories
Technology- & IT-Law

Data protection-compliant use of real data for test purposes in the IT system

Untested software is worthless – as far as the truism goes. Especially in the case of further developments or bug fixes in productive environments, not only is testing indispensable, but in particular one must work with real data.

The classic is a further developed customer support system to which the changeover is to be made. As a rule, initial test runs are carried out here (in extracts) with existing customer data records. But is this permissible under data protection law? This question has been controversial up to now, but has now been answered by the EU Court of Justice – quite satisfactorily – in a rough outline.

Categories
Technology- & IT-Law

Use subject to consent when using software in cloud computing?

The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt (“OLG”, 11 U 36/18) has commented on the question of whether a reproduction within the meaning of Section 69c No. 1 UrhG also exists if the use of software by way of cloud computing leads to a (technical) reproduction not on computers in the user’s domain, but on third-party servers that are within the sphere of influence of the authorized user.

This question has not yet been decided by the highest court. Some of the literature is of the opinion that there is no reproduction by the user if the accessing client does not receive a copy in the main memory of his computer or if the program is reproduced exclusively on the server of the service provider.

In general, the loading of a program into the RAM of another computer constitutes a reproduction within the meaning of Section 69c No. 1 of the German Copyright Act (UrhG). The main idea is that this loading of a program into the RAM of a computer enables further use of the program by means of further program copies.

The OLG is now of the opinion that the answer to the question of whether cloud computing constitutes an act of copying relevant under copyright law cannot be made dependent solely on the sphere of influence of the computer on which the copying takes place.

According to Section 69c No. 1 Sentence 2 UrhG, the consent of the copyright holder is always required if the “loading, displaying, running, transferring or storing” of the program requires duplication. The right of reproduction is one of the basic exploitation rights of the author (Sections 15 (1) No. 1, 16 UrhG). The basic consequence of reproduction is that the reproduced work can be used in the same way as the work itself (e.g. viewed, read, listened to ….). It thus enables additional enjoyment of the work.According to Section 69c No. 1 Sentence 2 UrhG, the consent of the copyright holder is always required if the “loading, displaying, running, transferring or storing” of the program requires duplication. The right of reproduction is one of the basic exploitation rights of the author (Sections 15 (1) No. 1, 16 UrhG). The basic consequence of reproduction is that the reproduced work can be used in the same way as the work itself (e.g. viewed, read, listened to ….). It thus enables additional enjoyment of the work.

The ratio of Section 69c No. 1 UrhG must also be seen against this background: The mere “enjoyment of a work” does not constitute an act of use relevant under copyright law, even in the case of computer programs. If a user has lawfully acquired a program and installed it on a stationary basis on his own PC, no copyright is infringed if he allows a third party to work with this program on this PC, nor if he allows a third party to watch a film he has acquired there (the OLG refers in this respect to BGH, I ZR 139/89). The use by the third party only becomes relevant under copyright law if the third party is enabled to make further use of the program by copying it. In the opinion of the OLG, however, this legal purpose applies irrespective of the sphere in which the reproduction required for the additional use takes place.

Categories
Labour law Technology- & IT-Law

Who owns customer data and contacts under German law?

“Who owns the customer data?” – a question that is not as modern as it seems at first glance. However, it can be seen that the question has become massively more acute in this day and age.

Where once there might have been a customer file on the desk or recorded in a central registry, today there are immediate contacts in personal networks such as LinkedIn and data storage on smartphones. Theoretically, it is conceivable that an employee or subcontractor could end the business relationship overnight – and have access to all important customer data without entering the office again.

A problem that is still underestimated – especially also in terms of criminal law, as our everyday life shows. Because increasingly, employees are confronted with the accusation of having “stolen” customer data.

Categories
Technology- & IT-Law

Copyright protection of software in Germany

Copyright protection of software under German law: According to § 69a para. 3 UrhG a software (“computer programs'”) is protected by copyright in Germany if it represents an individual work to the extent that it is the result of the author’s own intellectual creation. But when exactly does copyright protection of software exist in Germany?

Categories
Technology- & IT-Law

Copyright: When is one a perpetrator of copyright infringement under German law

In copyright law, many questions usually revolve around “Stoererhaftung” (Breach of Duty of Care) and less often around perpetration. It is therefore all the more interesting that the Federal Court of Justice (I ZR 88/13) has commented on the question of when one is a perpetrator of a copyright infringement. On this occasion, the BGH also clarifies that pure auxiliaries are excluded as perpetrators on the one hand, but online stores that automatically manage inventories through suppliers are perpetrators on the other hand. The latter in particular is likely to be of interest; discussions on responsibility are not uncommon in this area.

Categories
Technology- & IT-Law

Protection of trade secrets in Germany

Protection of secrets within the meaning of the German Business Secrets Protection Act: Protection of secrets within the meaning of the German Business Secrets Protection Act is an important aspect of intellectual property that helps companies in Germany to protect their confidential information and business secrets.

In the following, we will explain the meaning of the protection of secrets under the Trade Secrets Act, how it arises and what type of information can be protected.

Categories
Technology- & IT-Law

Legal issues around online computer games

Computer gaming has changed considerably in recent years: Where floppy disks and CDs were common in the past, sometimes in combination with obscure-looking copy protection measures (I like to remember the Mix’n’Mojo hub at Monkey Island,which, by the way, is also available online today), not only downloads prevail today, but also completely new gaming cultures that have partly shifted completely to the online realm.

Massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) have heralded a real cultural change in this respect – and also completely new legal issues: Whereas people used to be most concerned about how best to copy games, other desires prevail today. At a time when accounts cost money and virtual goods have a real market value, cheating in games is valued very differently. This is also reflected in current court decisions. Attorney Jens Ferner, active in the field of software law including the legal issues of online games, gives an overview of the legal situation in Germany.

Note: In our law firm by specialist lawyer for IT law Jens Ferner the creative industry is represented in the field of software law – especially game developers and software houses. No activity for consumers / private individuals!

Categories
Labour law Technology- & IT-Law

Effectiveness of repayment clauses in the training contract

The Federal Labor Court (9 AZR 187/22 and 9 AZR 260/21) once again dealt with an agreement between employee and employer on training costs. The problem regularly lies in the fact that an employer finances further training for an employee, but the employee then quits and uses the qualification acquired at the employer’s expense for another job.

Against this background, repayment clauses have developed in the event of termination, but these are regularly subject to legal review. And here, too, it is possible for courts to review the content – so that the written word alone is not decisive. In the present case, the employer had no claim against the employee for repayment of the training costs under the relevant clause of the training contract. This was because the provision did not stand up to a review of its content and was therefore invalid.