Section 2: Exploitation of objects protected by a neighbouring right by providers of online content sharing services

Articles in this section · 1

Article L219-2

French Intellectual Property CodeIn force

Updated 8 Nov 2023

I.-By providing access to objects protected by a related right uploaded by its users, the provider of an online content sharing service performs an act of exploitation that falls within the scope of the right of communication to the public or the broadcasting right of the holders of related rights mentioned in this title. The provider of an online content sharing service must obtain authorisation for this act of exploitation from the holders of related rights provided for in this title, without prejudice to the authorisations that he must obtain under the reproduction right for the reproductions of the said protected objects that he makes.


II. II - Article 6(2) and (3) of Law no. 2004-575 of 21 June 2004 on confidence in the digital economy do not apply to the provider of the online content sharing service in respect of acts of exploitation carried out by the provider. III.-1° In the absence of authorisation from the rightholders, the provider of an online content sharing service is liable for unauthorised acts of exploitation of objects protected by a related right, unless it can demonstrate that it has fulfilled all of the following conditions:


a) It has made its best efforts to ensure that the objects protected by a related right are not exploited in a way that is contrary to the rights of the rightholders. a) he has used his best efforts to obtain authorisation from the rightholders who wish to grant such authorisation;


> b) he has used his best efforts to obtain authorisation from the rightholders who wish to grant such authorisation b) It has made its best efforts, in accordance with the industry's high standards of professional diligence, to ensure the unavailability of specific protected subject matter for which rightholders have provided it, directly or indirectly via a third party designated by them, with the relevant and necessary information;


c) It has in any event acted promptly, upon receipt of a sufficiently reasoned notification from the rightholders, to block access to the protected subject-matter covered by the notification or to remove it from its service, and has made its best efforts to prevent such protected subject-matter being uploaded in the future, pursuant to b;



2° In order to determine whether the provider of the online content sharing service has complied with its obligations under 1, the following elements in particular shall be taken into account:


a) The type, audience and number of users of the content sharing service. a) The type, audience and size of the service, as well as the type of protected objects uploaded by users of the service;



b) the availability of suitable and effective means and their cost to the service provider;


3° By way of derogation from the conditions laid down in 1, for a period of three years after the service is made available to the public within the European Union and provided that it has an annual turnover of less than ten million euros calculated in accordance with European Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, in the absence of authorisation from the rightholders, the provider of an online content sharing service is liable for unauthorised acts of exploitation of objects protected by a related right, unless it demonstrates that it has fulfilled the following conditions:


(a) it has made its best efforts to obtain authorisation from rightholders wishing to grant such authorisation and has acted promptly, upon receipt of a notification in accordance with c) of 1, to block access to or remove from its service the protected subject-matter that is the subject of the notification;


(b) where the number of unauthorised uses of the protected subject-matter is greater than the number of unauthorised uses, it has acted promptly to block access to or remove from its service the protected subject-matter that is the subject-matter of the notification (b) where the average monthly number of its unique visitors in the European Union exceeded five million during the previous calendar year, it has also made its best efforts to prevent further uploads of the notified protected subject-matter for which the rightholders have provided it, directly or indirectly via a third party designated by them, with the relevant and necessary information.


The provider of the content-sharing service has also made its best efforts to prevent further uploads of the notified protected subject-matter for which the rightholders have provided it, directly or indirectly via a third party designated by them, with the relevant and necessary information. The provider of an online content-sharing service who invokes the application of this 3 to his service must provide documentary evidence of the required audience and turnover thresholds;


4° The provider of an online content sharing service acts solely on the basis of relevant and necessary information or notifications provided, directly or indirectly via a third party designated by them, by the rightholders.


IV. IV - Contracts under which the authorisations referred to in I are granted are, within the limits of their purpose, also deemed to authorise acts of communication to the public and television broadcasting carried out by the user of this service on condition that the latter is not acting for commercial purposes or that the revenue generated by the content uploaded by this user is not significant.


V -Measures taken within the framework of the authorisations referred to in I are, within the limits of their purpose, also deemed to authorise acts of communication to the public and television broadcasting carried out by the user of this service on condition that the latter is not acting for commercial purposes or that the revenue generated by the content uploaded by this user is not significant. V.-The measures taken under this article do not give rise either to the identification of individual users or to the processing of personal data except where this is in compliance with Act No. 78-17 of 6 January 1978 on Data Processing, Data Files and Individual Liberties and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC.

Mariela Petrova

Need help applying this article to your situation?

A registered French Lawyer explains what applies to your business — in English, fixed fee.

within 48h

Fixed Fee

Talk to a lawyer
Common Questions

Working with a corporate lawyer in France — Q&A

Any time a strategic decision changes how the company is owned, governed or contractually bound — incorporation, fundraising, M&A, restructuring, shareholder agreements, or major commercial contracts. Earlier engagement always costs less than later remediation.

A notary (notaire) is a public officer who authenticates specific deeds (mainly real-estate transfers and certain family-law acts). A corporate lawyer (avocat) advises on strategy, negotiates and drafts company documents, and represents you in disputes. The two roles complement rather than overlap.

Yes — most of our clients are foreign suppliers, investors or holding entities. We bridge the gap between French law and your home jurisdiction's expectations and deliver everything bilingually.

The SAS (Société par Actions Simplifiée) is the default choice for most international structures: flexible governance, single shareholder allowed, no minimum capital, and works cleanly with foreign holding entities. We assess SARL, SA, SCI on the merits when the situation calls for it.

Yes — communications with a French avocat are protected by the secret professionnel (Article 66-5 of the Law of 31 December 1971). This protection is broader than the common-law attorney-client privilege and applies to written and oral exchanges.

We work on fixed fees for clearly scoped engagements (incorporation, contract drafting, audits) and on monthly retainers for ongoing advisory. Hourly billing is the exception, not the default. You always know the cost before work starts.

Typical timeline is 2–3 weeks from KYC kick-off to RCS registration, assuming standard documentation. Holding-company structures, foreign-shareholder identification or in-kind contributions can extend this — we flag the gating items at the first meeting.

Absolutely. We routinely coordinate with your in-house counsel, expert-comptable or notaire — pragmatic collaboration is the norm, not the exception. We send them everything they need to do their part without duplicating work.

Mariela Petrova

Mariela Petrova

Avocate au Barreau de Paris

Toque #C2396

15+ Years In Corporate Practice

English · French · Russian

Ready When You Are

Talk To A Corporate
Lawyer In France.

A 20–30 minute call, in English, to scope the engagement. No obligation, no preliminary fee. You will leave the call with a clear view of what the work will cover and what it will cost.

First EngagementFixed Fee

Talk to a French lawyer.

Reply within 24 hours.

Communications protected by professional secrecy — secret professionnel de l'avocat, Article 66-5 of the Law of 31 December 1971.

Continue Reading

Related corporate services in France

01 / Setup

Setting up a French company

Choose between SAS, SARL, SA or SCI — and structure your first French entity around how you actually plan to operate.

Read More
02 / Operating

French commercial contracts

Distribution, agency, supply, services and IP licences — drafted around the protections French law actually gives.

Read More
03 / Disputes

Business disputes & litigation

Shareholder conflicts, commercial breaches and pre-litigation strategy — handled by the same team that knows the file.

Read More