This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:United States copyright law which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 12:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC) reply

It's almost ridiculous to say "copyright law" in the article's title since Germany's system of protection of rights on expressive works is not a copyright system and does not know such a term. -- eugrus ( talk) 16:08, 26 June 2016 (UTC) reply

This article has a fundamental misconception and gives wrong information. English Copyright is *not* the same as Urheberrecht. Perhaps the English copyright relates to German Verwertungsrechte/Nutzungsrechte, and the English Authorship rights relate to German Urheberschaft. But the current page should be deleted and rewritten from scratch, or should be thoroughly overhauled by a law expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.133.199.106 ( talk) 07:31, 2 February 2018 (UTC) reply

In particular, "the author is the only one who is able to take advantage of the exploitation rights" is wrong. UrhG § 31 (1) says: "Der Urheber kann einem anderen das Recht einräumen, das Werk auf einzelne oder alle Nutzungsarten zu nutzen (Nutzungsrecht)."

Also this is wrong: "the copyright itself cannot be transferred as long as the author is alive". Correct is (UrhG § 29) that the Urheberrecht is not transferable, which is a different thing. The copyright (right to copy = Nutzungsrechte) can be transferred.

This bootleg CD litigation involving English rock guitarist Eric Clapton may warrant coverage here as a notable case? The woman involved could, under German copyright law, face a fine of up to £212,353 or six months in prison if she relists the offending CD on eBay again. Quite significant criminal penalties therefore. Here are a couple of english‑language citations in wikipedia (WCF) format:

• Snapes and Oltermann (2021) on German copyright  ^[1]
• Burke (2021) on Clapton bootleg CD case  ^[2]

The Guardian also ran these two stories quite prominently. With best wishes, RobbieIanMorrison ( talk) 09:42, 23 December 2021 (UTC) reply