The streaming warnings against RedTube users are legally possibly with feet of clay, now also grants the Attorney Thomas Urmann from the law firm Urmann colleagues + (U + C). First, however, should the case against Abgemahnt, but not cash willing RedTube users continue to run as usual, so Urmann in Focus .If
but “ not something wrong with the chain of rights” to be, it could cause problems to the compensation claims against RedTube affected users to court. No doubt unfounded. Last messages made the rounds that are not on the rights to the affected RedTube movies owned by the Swiss company “The archives AG”. If true, so that the legal basis for the warnings would be invalid, that were sent by the Registry U + C on behalf of “The archives AG”.
The unclear situation could be one of the reasons why U + C is said to have so far not taken any further steps against the Abgemahnt RedTube users. At least this is the assessment of the lawyers Christian Solmecke and John of males, representing hundreds of Abgemahnt RedTube users. Their mandates have the required warning costs of around 250 euros is not paid, without that it would have led to legal consequences, reports the Focus .
that – possibly – want to make wrong Abgemahnt user damage claims against the firm U + C contends Urmann brings not from the rest. The Abgemahnt RedTube users have in the worst case, Urmann, “ a claim for damages against The Archive “. His firm would also “ by a high liability insurance protected “. Although the streaming warnings have changed for the abmahnenden firms from a potential and lucrative business model to a moderate debacle is Urman is not impressed. Neither of the many critics still the perception of the federal government, which basically classifies the viewing of streaming offerings as legal, but the last word ascribes to the European Court of Justice.
provided by the firm Müller Müller Rößner complaint referred Urmann in Bavarian Radio (BR) as “ complete, legal mischief “. Compared to the BR justified the attorney Carl Christian Müller the lawsuit: “ From our perspective it is a coercive act, when a lawyer against rechtsunkundigen consumers a legal facts alleged, which is not given so crystal clear. “For streaming RedTube videos is the opinion of Müller no copyright infringement.
the firm U + C you can see the different. Even the injunction against “The archives AG”, which RedTube has obtained before the Regional Court of Hamburg – and which prohibits the Swiss company, warn other RedTube users – is for Urmann no reason to rush to hoist the white flag: “ Here, the tenor is so narrow formulated by the regional court Hamburg that one could ship with minimal changes, if you wanted more warnings , “Urmann told the BR . Speaking to the means Bavarian newspaper (MZ), he reiterated that more users could be sued by porn sites with legal means, such as warnings. Details are not known, but the MZ cites Urmann with the vague hint in the coming week “ it is stressful again “.