Case Law

Depicta Legal is a legal practice with extensive experience in both amicable and judicial copyright infringement cases. Our firm understands the value of providing strong legal protection to photographers and creators, and we are committed to achieving positive outcomes.

Throughout our history, we have resolved countless international copyright infringement cases outside of the courtroom for hundreds of photographers. We have also won favorable judgments in several European courts.

Check out this list for some of the successful verdicts that we have obtained through our firm and our network of partners in copyright infringement cases.

Location photo by: Nok Lek / Shutterstock

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Germany/Austria)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Innsbruck, Austria)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Injunction – International jurisdiction (Graz, Austria), fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Value in dispute: 6,000€, Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Location photo by: Catarina Belova / Shutterstock

Opponent in France – damage 3.500 € plus interest

Defendant nationality: France
Lawyer: Robert Fechner
Claimant nationality: German

  • Court: AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: 3.500 € plus interest since 23.01.2018 + 926 € legal fees plus interest since 06.03.2020

The Amtsgericht Berlin sentences the defendant based in France to pay the amounts 3.500 € plus interest since 23.01.2018 + 926 € legal fees plus interest since 06.03.2020 to the claimant based in Germany. The defendant violated the Cease and Desist claim, and did not cease to make the photograph in question publicly available, in particular on the Internet. The court granted 3.500 € as a reasonable penalty.

See the verdict

Location photo by: Adam Machowiak / Shutterstock

International jurisdiction (Dublin, Ireland), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Ireland

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Location photo by: Simone Gramegna / Shutterstock

Contractual Penalty – opponent from the Netherlands, a court in Germany

Claimant nationality: German
Defendant nationality: Netherlands
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin

  • Damage won: 5.001 € plus interest since 20.08.2017 + 1.101,94 € legal fees plus interest since 05.03.2020 + 113,05 €

Summary: The Landgericht Berlin (District Court) sentences the defendant based in the Netherlands to pay the amounts 5.001 € plus interest since 20.08.2017 + 1.101,94 € legal fees plus interest since 05.03.2020 + 113,05 € documentation fees to the claimant based in Germany. The defendant violated the Cease and Desist claim, and did not cease to make the photograph in question publicly available, in particular on the Internet. The evidence to prove this was made by RightsPilot UG. Therefore, the court agreed that the claim was admissible and justified. The claimant had a contractually defined right to claim the contractual penalty, because the cease and desist declaration was violated, without there being a visible reason for excuse. Therefore, also the legal fees and the documentation fees needed to be reimbursed.

See the verdict

Court Gergerland Arnhem – Damage won: 1359,81

Photographer’s seat of residence: German
Opponent’s seat of residence: Dutch
Lawyer: Kitty van Boven

  • Court: Court Gergerland Arnhem, Netherlands

  • Damage won: 1359,81 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Court in Midden – Damage won: 3372,56 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  United States
Opponent’s seat of residence: Netherlands
Lawyer: Kitty van Bowen

  • Court: Midden, Netherlands

  • Damage won:3372,56 euros damages + 3051,83 Euro costs reimbursed

See the verdict

Court Zeeland West Brabant – Damage won: 540 euros + all legal costs

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Netherlands
Lawyer: Kitty van Boven

  • Court: Court West Brabant, Netherlands

  • Damage won: 540 euros + all legal costs

See the verdict

District Court in Den Bosch – Damage won: 2906 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Netherlands
Lawyer: Kitty van Boven

  • Court: District Court, Den Bosch, Netherlands

  • Damage won: 2906 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

District Court Rechtbank Amsterdam – Damage won: 1396 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence: American
Opponent’s seat of residence: Netherlands
Lawyer: Kitty van Boven

  • Court: Midden, Netherlands

  • Damage won: 1395 euros ((3x MFM recommendation) + all costs

See the verdict

District Court Rechtbank Den Haag – Damage won: 1882,50 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Netherlands

  • Court: Den Haag, Netherlands

  • Damage won: 1883 euros (3 x MF recommendation) + all costs

See the verdict

Location photo by: Emily Marie Wilson / Shutterstock

Berlin, Germany: Contractual Penalty (5001,00€ plus interest)

Opponent’s seat of residence: Romania
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Verdict: 5001 Euro for the Contractual Penalty + all costs

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Innsbruck, Austria)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Location photo by: Sven Hansche / Shutterstock

Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (London, United Kingdom), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: UK

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Damage won: 8400 euros from UK opponent

Defendant nationality: British
Claimant nationality: German
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 8400 euros reimbursement

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (London, United Kingdom), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: UK

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Verdict – 10.000 Euro reimbursement + legal fees + documentation fees from an opponent in the UK

Opponent’s seat of residence:  United Kingdom
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court:  Landgericht Court Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 10.000 euros + legal fees + documentation fees.

The Landgericht Berlin (District Court) sentences the defendant based in country 1 to pay the amount of 10.002 € plus interest + 1.266,16 € legal fees plus interest + 142 € docu fees to the claimant based in country2. The defendant violated the Cease and Desist claim, and did not cease to make the photographs in question publicly available, in particular on the Internet. The evidence to prove this was made by RightsPilot UG. Therefore, the court agreed that the claim was admissible and justified. The claimant had a contractually defined right to claim two penalties because the cease and desist declaration was violated twice, concerning two photographs, without there being a visible reason for the excuse. Therefore, also the legal fees and the documentation fees needed to be reimbursed.

See the verdict

Location photo by: ecstk22 / Shutterstock

Appeal Court Sofia, Bulgaria – Damage won: 2556 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Bulgaria

  • Lawyer: Dimo Gospodinov

  • Court: Appeal Court Sofia, Bulgaria

  • Damage won: 2556 euros reimbursementsBerlin

See the verdict

Appeal Court Sofia, Bulgaria  – Damage won: 2715 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Bulgaria

  • Lawyer: Dimo Gospodinov

  • Court: Appeal Court Sofia, Bulgaria

  • Damage won: 2715 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Court Sofia – Damage won: 2670 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Bulgaria

  • Lawyer: Dimo Gospodinov

  • Damage won: 2670 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Court Sofia – Damage won: 2952 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Bulgaria

  • Lawyer: Dimo Gospodinov

  • Court: Appeal Court Sofia, Bulgaria

  • Damage won: 2 952 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Location photo by: VOJTa Herout / Shutterstock

Landgericht München I, Germany: €2930 Reimbursements + €679.10 legal fees + All court fees

Claimant from: German
Defendant from: Portugal

  • Court: Landgericht München I, Germany

  • Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • The court ruled in favour of the photographer on all points:

    1. The defendant was permanently prohibited from making the photograph publicly accessible online without the photographer’s explicit permission. Any violation will trigger a court-imposed fine of up to €250,000, or substitute imprisonment.

    2. The defendant was ordered to pay €2,930.00 in damages, plus interest dating back to September 2019. By awarding the full amount, the court gave de facto recognition to the asserted licensing value.

    3. The court also ordered the defendant to reimburse €679.10 in legal fees related to the pre-litigation effort including preparing cease and desist order, along with statutory interest from March 2024.

    4. As the losing party, the defendant must also bear the full costs of the legal proceedings.

    5. The verdict is enforceable without delay.

    6. Dispute Value Set: €8,930.00

See the verdict

Landgericht Hannover, Germany: €5001 Contractual Penalty + €1,101.94 for legal fees and €112.05 for documentation and evidence collection

Claimant from: German
Defendant from: Germany

  • Court: Landgericht Hannover, Germany

  • Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • The defendant was ordered to pay:

    a) €5,001 as a contractual penalty

    b) €1,101.94 for legal fees incurred during the enforcement and €112.05 for documentation and evidence collection. Legal and documentation costs were considered valid and proportional.

    d) Statutory interest on the awarded amounts

    Another important point is that the court rejected the defendant’s counterclaim, which sought reimbursement of their own legal costs on the basis that the original warning was allegedly unjustified.

See the verdict

Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany: €1688 Reimbursements + All court fees

Claimant nationality: German
Defendant nationality: German

  • Court: Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Damage won: 1688 euros reimbursements + all court fees

See the verdict

Germany, 6517 euros reimbursements & injunction granted – opponent in Greece

Opponent’s seat of residence: Greece
Lawyer: Robert Fechner
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Damage won: 6517 euros reimbursements & injunction granted

See the verdict

Amtsgericht Ahaus – 551 euros for legal fees + opponent covers court fees

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Amtsgericht Ahaus

  • Damage won: 551 euros for legal fees plus opponent covers court fees

See the verdict

Amtsgericht München, Germany: Verdict – Damages (1061,00€ )

Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Sebastian Deubelli

  • Damage won: 1566 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Desenzano del Garda, Italy), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Germany/Austria)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Leipzig, Germany)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (London, United Kingdom), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: UK

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Berlin, Germany: Verdict – Contractual Penalty (5001,00€)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Italy
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin

  • Damage won: 5001 euros + 50 euros costs + interest of 8% over the basic interest rate

See the verdict

Berlin, Germany: Verdict – Damages calculated in accordance with MFM, Value in Dispute 6,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: German
Opponent’s seat of residence: German
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Verdict: 540 euros damages + 551 euros legal fees + all costs

See the verdict

Contractual Penalty – opponent from Netherlands, court in Germany

Claimant nationality: German
Defendant nationality: Netherlands
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin

  • Damage won: 5.001 € plus interest since 20.08.2017 + 1.101,94 € legal fees plus interest since 05.03.2020 + 113,05 €

Summary: The Landgericht Berlin (District Court) sentences the defendant based in the Netherlands to pay the amounts 5.001 € plus interest since 20.08.2017 + 1.101,94 € legal fees plus interest since 05.03.2020 + 113,05 € documentation fees to the claimant based in Germany. The defendant violated the Cease and Desist claim, and did not cease to make the photograph in question publicly available, in particular on the Internet. The evidence to prove this was made by RightsPilot UG. Therefore, the court agreed that the claim was admissible and justified. The claimant had a contractually defined right to claim the contractual penalty, because the cease and desist declaration was violated, without there being a visible reason for excuse. Therefore, also the legal fees and the documentation fees needed to be reimbursed.

See the verdict

Court AG Ahaus, Germany Verdict – Legal Fees reimbursement

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Amtsgericht Ahaus

  • Damage won: 551 euros for legal fees & court fees

See the verdict

Court Berlin, Germany: Legal Fees- Value in Dispute 12.000 Euro for 2 photos

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Berlin, Germany

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Gdańsk, Poland)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Innsbruck, Austria)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Modena, Italy)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Kirkel, Germany)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Split, Croatia)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Croatia

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order, Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Germany
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Damage won: 8400 euros from UK opponent

Defendant nationality: British|
Claimant nationality: German
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court:District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 8400 euros reimbursement

See the verdict

AG Charlottenburg, Germany: Damages calculated in accordance with MFM, Value in Dispute 6,000€ per image

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Court: AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Verdict: Damages calculated in accordance with MFM, Value in Dispute 6,000€ per image

See the verdict

District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Nicosia, Cyprus)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Cyprus

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Verdict – Damages 1055 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin

  • Damage won: 1055 euros

See the verdict

European Enforcement: 1.566,25 euros reimbursement

Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Sebastian Deubelli

  • Court: Landgericht München, Germany

  • Damages won: 1.566,25 euros reimbursement

See the verdict

European Enforcement: 7643 euros reimbursement from Italian opponent

Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 7643 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Injunction – International jurisdiction (Graz, Austria), fine up to 250,000€

Photographer's seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

International jurisdiction (Cologne, Germany / Dubai, UAE), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Dubai, UAE

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Court of Appeal Kammergericht: Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250,000€

See the verdict

International jurisdiction (Dublin, Ireland), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Ireland

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Valletta, Malta)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Malta

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Barcelona, Spain)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Spain

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Value in dispute: 6,000€, Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Landgericht Court Berlin, Germany: 6215,99 euros won (opponent from USA)

Opponent’s seat of residence:  USA
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court:  Landgericht Court Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 5001 euros for the contractual penalty, 1101,94 euros legal fees and 113,05 euros for documentation costs reimbursements

  • Total: 6215,99 euros

See the verdict

Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany – Defendant nationality: American

Defendant nationality: American
Claimant nationality: German
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: 2136 euros reimbursements + all court fees

See the verdict

AG Charlottenburg, Germany, Opponent in France – damage 3.500 € plus interest

Defendant nationality: France
Lawyer: Robert Fechner
Claimant nationality: German

  • Court: AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: 3.500 € plus interest since 23.01.2018 + 926 € legal fees plus interest since 06.03.2020

The Amtsgericht Berlin sentences the defendant based in France to pay the amounts 3.500 € plus interest since 23.01.2018 + 926 € legal fees plus interest since 06.03.2020 to the claimant based in Germany. The defendant violated the Cease and Desist claim, and did not cease to make the photograph in question publicly available, in particular on the Internet. The court granted 3.500 € as a reasonable penalty.

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (Faro, Portugal), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Portugal

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (London, United Kingdom), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: UK

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (Poznań, Poland), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (Stuttgart, Germany)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Value in dispute: 9,000€, Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Court: Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250 euros

See the verdict

Verdict – 10.000 Euro reimbursement + legal fees + documentation fees from an opponent in the UK

Opponent’s seat of residence:  United Kingdom
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court:  Landgericht Court Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 10.000 euros + legal fees + documentation fees

The Landgericht Berlin (District Court) sentences the defendant based in country1 to pay the amounts 10.002 € plus interest + 1.266,16 € legal fees plus interest + 142 € docu fees to the claimant based in country2. The defendant violated the Cease and Desist claim, and did not cease to make the photographs in question publicly available, in particular on the Internet. The evidence to prove this was made by RightsPilot UG. Therefore, the court agreed that the claim was admissible and justified. The claimant had a contractually defined right to claim two penalties, because the cease and desist declaration was violated twice, concerning two photographs, without there being a visible reason for the excuse. Therefore, also the legal fees and the documentation fees needed to be reimbursed.

See the verdict

Verdict – Damages calculated in accordance with MFM, Value in Dispute 6,000€ per image

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Portugal
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: 1140 euros damages + 290 euros costs + 853 euros legal fees reimbursement

See the verdict

Location photo by: Shutterstock / proslgn

Berlin, Germany: Verdict – Contractual Penalty (5001,00€)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Italia
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin

  • Damage won: 5001 euros + 50 euros costs + interest of 8% over the basic interest rate

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Modena, Italy)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

District Court Corte d’Appello Milan – Damage won: 1920 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy
Lawyer: Luca Ghedina

  • Court: Corte D’Appello, Milan

  • Damage won: 1920 euros damages + 1006 euros legal fees and costs reimbursement

See the verdict

European Enforcement: 1.566,25 euros reimbursement

Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Sebastian Deubelli

  • Court: Landgericht München, Germany

  • European Enforcement: 1.566,25 euros reimbursement

See the verdict

European Enforcement: 7643 euros reimbursement from Italian opponent

Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 7643 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (Vigasio, Italy), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Italy

  • District Court: Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 7643 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

Location photo by: Patryk Kosmider / Shutterstock

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Gdańsk, Poland)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

District Court Kraków – Damage won: 1085 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Kraków, Poland

  • Damage won: 1085 euros reimbursements + legal fees + documentation fees

See the verdict

District Court Warsaw – Damage won: 582 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Warsaw, Poland

  • Damage won: 582 + legal costs

See the verdict

District Court Wrocław – Damage won: 413 euros

Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Wrocław, Poland

  • Damage won: 413 euros

See the verdict

International jurisdiction (Warsaw, Poland), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Order – International jurisdiction (Poznań, Poland), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Poland 

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Location photo by: SCStock / Shutterstock

Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Barcelona, Spain)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Spain

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Location photo by: Sean Pavone / Shutterstock

Injunction against a stock agency

Claimant nationality: Swiss
Defendant nationality: U.S.
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin

Case description:

  • A major stock agency offered numerous video clips of our client for the sale.

  • The client had never uploaded those photographs to this stock agency. Moreover, his prices for photos are much higher than what this agency offered, so this event caused major damage to him.

  • those video clips even were sold, which caused illegal licenses.

  • Our client contacted the agency asking to take those clips down.

  • Agency did not comply completely – PhotoClaim could detect that 37 videos were still online. Therefore evidence was secured.

  • PhotoClaim’s lawyer also contacted the agency to take those clips down.

  • Despite that, the agency did not take down mentioned videos from its website, nor signed a Declaration to Cease and Desist.

  • Robert Fechner filed an injunction in Berlin court.

  • The court confirmed that the agency is liable to take all those clips down with due diligence and announced a possible penalty of 250.000€ if the order would be not respected.

See the verdict

Landgericht Court Berlin, Germany: 6215,99 euros won (opponent from USA)

Opponent’s seat of residence:  USA
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court:  Landgericht Court Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 5001 euros for the contractual penalty, 1101,94 euros legal fees and 113,05 euros for documentation costs reimbursements
    Total: 6215,99 euros

See the verdict

Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany – Defendant nationality: American

Defendant nationality: American
Claimant nationality: German
Lawyer: Robert Fechner

  • Court: Local Court AG Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: 2136 euros reimbursements + all court fees

See the verdict

Location photo by: Evgeni Fabisuk / Shutterstock

District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: Order – International jurisdiction (Nicosia, Cyprus)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Cyprus

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Location photo by: Neirfy / Shutterstock

Berlin Germany: 6517 euros reimbursements from a Greek opponent

Lawyer: Robert Fechner
Photographer’s seat of residence:  Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence:  Greece

  • Court: Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: 6517 euros reimbursements

See the verdict

6517 euros reimbursements & injunction granted – opponent in Greece

Opponent’s seat of residence: Greece
Lawyer: Robert Fechner
Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany

  • Damage won: 6517 euros reimbursements & injunction granted


See the verdict

Location photo by: Karina Movsesyan / Shutterstock

Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Valletta, Malta)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Malta

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict

Location photo by: Rafael Bischof / Shutterstock

Order – International jurisdiction (Faro, Portugal), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Portugal

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Damage won: Fine up to 250 000 euros

See the verdict

Verdict – Damages calculated in accordance with MFM, Value in Dispute 6,000€ per image

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Portugal
Lawyer: Filipp Bickel

  • Court: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Germany

  • Damage won: 1140 euros damages + 290 euros costs + 853 euros legal fees reimbursement

See the verdict

Location photo by: Rasto SK / Shutterstock

International jurisdiction (Cologne, Germany / Dubai, UAE), Fine up to 250,000€

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Dubai, UAE

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Court of Appeal Kammergericht: Berlin, Germany

See the verdict

Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany: International jurisdiction (Innsbruck, Austria)

Photographer’s seat of residence: Germany
Opponent’s seat of residence: Austria

  • Court: District Court Landgericht Berlin, Germany

  • Verdict: Injunction and Jurisdiction of the Court in Berlin

See the verdict
Data protection Legal Site Notice
Your trusted legal partners for copyright enforcement.