BGH ruling "Influencer II"

LEGAL+ NEWS

In its “Influencer II” ruling, the Federal Court of Justice clarified in response to rejected claims by the VSW (“Association of Social Competition”) that the influencer only has to provide an advertising label for their post if they receive a consideration from the company in question. The press release states:

In the press release states:

“(…) With regard to commercial acts in favor of third-party companies, the assumption of a violation of Section 5a para. 6 UWG is ruled out because the defendant did not receive any consideration for the contested contributions and these contributions therefore satisfy the overriding special provisions of Section 6 para. 1 no. 1 TMG, Section 58 para. 1 sentence 1 RStV and Section 22 para. 1 sentence 1 MStV (see the above comments on proceedings I ZR 125/20). Accordingly, there is also no violation of No. 11 of the Annex to Section 3 (3) UWG. “

Do you have any questions?

LATEST ARTICLES

Commercial law

Recognition and enforceability of foreign judgments

The question of the recognition and enforceability of foreign judgments in Germany is of great practical relevance: If a foreign (non-European) business partner threatens to sue in his home country in the event of a conflict, a decision must be made as to whether or not a defense against a possible lawsuit abroad makes sense.

LEGAL+ meets Legal Tech: LEGAL+ starts cooperation with BlockAxs

Legal+ is now relying on legal tech in contract law and the intelligent, artificial intelligence-based digital contract management solution ContrAxs.

Corona and contract law: Disruption of contracts

The coronavirus is forcing countries around the world to take drastic measures to counter the spread of the virus. This is having a serious impact on contract law. Many of these measures mean that contracts can no longer be fulfilled by at least one party. The cases affected are countless.