The Court of Justice has recently pronounced (21.06.2012 – C-5/11) on a rather peculiar case, that of Titus Alexander Jochen Donner, a german citizen who had the idea of purchasing industrial design works in Italy, which were not copyrighted when the events occurred, and subsequently sold them in Germany, where they were actually copyrighted. As a matter of fact who made the selling was the italian company that publicized its property abroad, received orders from Germany and delivered them through Donner’s company which simply collected the money from purchasers and paid the italian company.
This activity facilitating the commission of the offense, and above all the fact that property was made available, was seen as a conjectured involvement in the alleged criminal offence where the transporter was involved. The Court of Justice, invoked to pronounce on the matter, has ordained that arranging delivery and selling ways that will allow consumers from other countries to buy property is already a distribution to the public even if the physical manufacturer is not the same and the selling contract is juridically signed with third parties. Furthermore, it has added that the fact that such works were sold in Germany, or that their selling was made easier, legitimized the opportunity for the state — in case the works are protected — to investigate the transporter as an accomplice even when said transporter does not simply deliver property but that also takes care about collecting the money from purchases on vendor’s behalf. With regard to the trade restriction as a consequence of law application, the Court reiterates stating that this limitation is justified because it aims to protect copyright that might make it necessary to apply legal sanctions.