ISP-Liability & Media Law
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.01.09
Other sections of this issue:
Privacy & Data Protection | ISP-Liability & Media Law | Contracts & E-Commerce |
Electronic Communications & IT
A French draft act, aimed at combating copyright infringements by obliging internet access providers to monitor their subscribers’ behavior and to cut off repeat offenders, has met criticism from the European Commission.
Introduction
In a previous contribution we have already commented on the work of the French Olivennes Commission. Further to the activities of this Commission, the French Government has worked out a “Draft Act on the promotion of the distribution and protection of creativity on the internet”. In the framework of the Notification Directive 98/34, the European Commission has now issued some comments on the Draft Act.
The European Commission’s position
The European Commission’s position is interesting in at least two respects.
First, the fact that a government authority (the “rights Protection Committee”) would send a notice to subscribers who commit copyright infringements, has created some concern: “the Commission is concerned about the fact of ascertaining whether the French Authorities consider that the fact that the message in question is sent by the Rights Protection Committee to “the subscriber, on its own behalf, by email and via the party whose activity is to provide access to public online communication services having concluded a contract with the subscriber” would have the effect that such operator would no longer enjoy the waiving of liability laid down in the Directive on electronic commerce”.
Second, the Commission has expressed concern that the Draft Act could lead to imposing some kind of monitoring obligation upon French internet access providers: “it should also be underlined that it is important that, in any state of events, the implementation of such measures, which would fall within the framework of relations between the subscriber and his Internet access provider, do not succeed in imposing on the part of the latter, in law or in fact, even indirectly, a general obligation to monitor Internet access. The Commission would here like to recall that, under Article 15, paragraph 1, of the Directive on electronic commerce, Member States must not impose upon intermediate service providers “a general obligation (…) to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity”. The requirement to obviate any general monitoring obligation also subsists as regards the procedures of implementation of the obligations to which Internet access providers are subject, given that these procedures will also be established at a later stage”
Practical consequences
The European Commission’s remarks are not binding, and the French Government may elect not to take these into account. However, since this attitude would open up the way to future actions for failure to comply with EC law and/or to defenses before the national courts that the French legislation is not in conformity with EC law, it is expected that the Commission’s remarks will be taken into account at least to some degree. This is important, since it may put a stop to a tendency in France to impose general monitoring obligations upon internet service providers, contrary to the wording of Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive.
References: Observations of the European Commission
For more information, contact: Christoph De Preter.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.10.26
European Commission Publishes Landmark Guidelines on Exclusionary Abuses by Dominant Companies
On 3 September 2026, the European Commission adopted new Guidelines on the application of Article 102 TFEU to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings. The Guidelines follow a public consultation on a draft published in August 2024 and reflect substantial stakeholder feedback. They replace the Commission's 2008 Guidance on enforcement priorities (which ceases to apply 30 days after publication of the new guidelines in the Official Journal) and represent the most significant reset of the Commission's Article 102 enforcement framework in nearly two decades. The Commission's stated aim is to set out principles and operational guidance, enhance legal certainty, and help companies self-assess their exclusionary-abuse risk.
Client Alert | 5 min read | 09.09.26
Client Alert | 8 min read | 09.08.26
Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa [2026] UKSC 21: Good Faith in the Boardroom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.08.26
IRS Takes Aim: Proposed Rule Threatens Tax-Exempt Status of Private Schools

