”
Platforms in focus of trademark-law information claims
\n\n
In its judgment of 11 July 2018 (Case No. 22 O 1330/17), the Regional Court (Landgericht) of Braunschweig held that an operator of an online marketplace may be obliged to provide information about the identity of merchants suspected of having committed trademark infringements by distributing counterfeit branded products. The background was a lawsuit brought by a trademark owner who had discovered products bearing its registered trademark on the platform which, in its own assessment, were counterfeits.
\n
Right to information under Section 19 of the German Trademark Act (MarkenG) against platform operators
\n\n
In particular, the parties disputed whether the statutory right to information under Section 19 MarkenG can also be asserted against the operator of the sales platform or only against the directly acting third parties. In its decision, the Regional Court relied on the consideration that the operator was actively involved as an intermediary in the distribution of the goods by providing the technical infrastructure and the platform for the sale.
\n\n
In the course of the proceedings, the trademark owner argued, among other things, that it was limited to its own research options because the actual supplier of the allegedly counterfeit goods could not be identified without the support of the platform operators. The court followed this argument and affirmed the platform operator’s obligation to provide the requested information insofar as it can be provided within what is reasonable and with due regard to data-protection provisions.
\n
Scope of the information and balancing of interests
\n\n
The court made it clear that, as a rule, the right to information can be satisfied by communicating the name and an address suitable for service of process of the alleged infringer. In the present case, the platform operator had initially argued that it did not have such data or was not permitted to store it; however, the Regional Court did not consider this argument to be persuasive. Rather, where there are sufficient indications of a trademark infringement, the request for information must be granted, with a careful balancing of interests always to be carried out, taking into account data-protection concerns as well as the legitimate claims of the trademark owner.
\n
Significance for online marketplaces and rights holders
\n\n
This decision of the Regional Court of Braunschweig illustrates the responsibility of online marketplace operators in protecting trademark rights and underscores their duties to cooperate in pursuing potential infringements on their platforms. At the same time, the court emphasized that such a duty to provide information remains limited by the applicable statutory restrictions and data-protection considerations.
\n\n
The proceedings concern a specific individual case and point to general risks and challenges for marketplace operators and rights holders; at the time of reporting, there was no final, highest-court decision on this issue (source: https://urteile.news/LG-Braunschweig_22-O-133017_Internet-Marktplatz-zur-Auskunft-ueber-Markenfaelschungen-durch-Dritte-verpflichtet~N26285).
\n
Duty to provide notice for legal issues in the context of commercial law
\n\n
Dealing with trademark-law claims and the related demands for information poses a complex challenge for both operators of digital marketplaces and trademark owners. For legal questions in this context, MTR Legal—an internationally oriented full-service commercial law firm—provides comprehensive support to companies, investors, and discerning private individuals. Detailed information on individual support can be found under the offering for legal advice in commercial law.
“
