Summary
Article on the role of intent in the act of communication to the public in copyright law. In 1996, the Belgian Court of Cassation held that the intention of the person spreading a work was irrelevant. The article traces how the Court of Justice of the European Union later revived this criterion, through cases such as Svensson, GS Media, Stichting Brein (Filmspeler), Stim and Sami, Mircom and YouTube, until the deliberate nature of the intervention became decisive in several situations. It concludes that there can be no act of communication without a deliberate intervention, made in full knowledge of its consequences, and that this criterion also separates communication to the public from the mere provision of physical facilities.
Reference
H. Haouideg, « Animo deliberato : le rôle de l'intention dans l'acte de communication au public », I.R.D.I., 2022/3, p. 277.