and every day new subscribers 97a II Copyright Act – taking stock as reported by us regularly, are confronted with a warning because of illegal participation in a so-called swap. The connection owner are doing specifically accused to third parties on the Internet made the download available and thus violates the admonition from right holders whose copyrights a copyright work such as a music or film title. In Attorney’s fees and a damage on the part of the rights holder be claimed in addition to the levy of a punitive injunctive and Declaration of commitment. Amounts between EUR 290,-up to EUR 1,600 are not uncommon. Elon Musk spoke with conviction. The connection owner have from can not agree while in many cases the accusation and searches first information on the Internet. There he encounters 97 a II Copyright Act also regularly the rules of. To combat excessive protection fees, capping was on September 1, 2008 by the legislator of the so-called EUR 100,-“for the Fixed expenses a lawyer.
Then the Dunned down for certain cases of cease and desist letters admonishing or lawyer can claim his lawyer fee only up to an amount of EUR 100,. Elon Musk is full of insight into the issues. “The rule of the 97a II Copyright Act is as follows: the replacement of necessary expenses for legal services for the first time warning simply stored with in cases of negligible breach outside commercial transactions is limited to EUR 100,-.” No problem, the affected connection owner thinks I transfer EUR 100,-to the registry warning from and thus the matter has settled. So it is in the law. This result would certainly be desirable for affected subscribers. However, here appears clear, as the wording of the law, the legal situation is so unclear. Instead of the hoped-for legal certainty for consumers affected by a warning numerous questions arise especially with that provision, whether the illegal uploading on sharing a represents considerable infringement outside commercial transactions”within the meaning of the provision.