The CJEU Anne Frank judgment and its broader implications (including for the internet and, obviously, AI too)

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has issued its judgment in Anne Frank, C-788/24, a referral from the Netherlands concerning the right of communication to the public under Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive. The case involves the online publication of The Diary of Anne Frank, which is partly protected in some Member States. The CJEU's decision has broader implications for the internet and artificial intelligence (AI), as it addresses the balance between copyright protection and the dissemination of cultural heritage online.

The CJEU's judgment in Anne Frank, C-788/24, marks a significant development in the application of EU intellectual property law. The case was referred to the CJEU by the Netherlands, which sought guidance on the interpretation of Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive. This provision governs the right of communication to the public and has been at the center of several high-profile disputes over online copyright infringement. The CJEU's decision will have far-reaching implications for internet service providers, AI developers, and cultural institutions seeking to balance copyright protection with the dissemination of cultural heritage online.

The InfoSoc Directive is a cornerstone of EU intellectual property law, aimed at harmonizing national laws on copyright and related rights. Article 3(1) of the directive establishes the right of communication to the public, which allows authors or their representatives to control how their works are made available online. The CJEU has previously addressed the scope of this provision in several cases, including GS Media v Sanoma (C-160/15). However, the Anne Frank case presents a unique set of circumstances, as it involves the publication of a work that is partly protected in some Member States.

The implications of the CJEU's decision in Anne Frank, C-788/24, will extend beyond the specific facts of the case. The judgment may influence the development of AI technologies that rely on copyrighted materials, such as image recognition software or language translation tools. Moreover, the decision could have significant consequences for internet service providers, which may be held liable for copyright infringement by their users.

The CJEU's judgment in Anne Frank, C-788/24, will provide critical guidance on the application of Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive. Practitioners should closely follow the decision and its implications for the internet and AI. As the CJEU continues to shape EU intellectual property law, it is essential that legal professionals stay abreast of these developments to ensure they can provide effective advice to their clients.