Draft bill on imple­men­ta­ti­on of Digi­tal Con­tent Direc­ti­ve published

The EU Direc­ti­ve 2019/770 on ‘cer­tain aspects of con­tract law rela­ting to the pro­vi­si­on of digi­tal con­tent and digi­tal ser­vices’ (in short: Digi­tal Ser­vices Direc­ti­ve) dates from 20 May 2019. The main objec­ti­ve of the Direc­ti­ve is to impro­ve access to digi­tal con­tent and ser­vices for con­su­mers and to har­mo­ni­se it across Euro­pe. As descri­bed in Reci­tal 3 of the Digi­tal Ser­vices Direc­ti­ve, this is inten­ded to achie­ve a ‘genui­ne digi­tal sin­gle mar­ket’ while ensu­ring a high level of con­su­mer pro­tec­tion. Howe­ver, EU direc­ti­ves are not direct­ly appli­ca­ble, but must be trans­po­sed into natio­nal law by the Mem­ber Sta­tes through imple­men­ting acts. For the imple­men­ta­ti­on of the direc­ti­ve in Ger­ma­ny, the respon­si­ble BMJV published a first draft bill (RefE) on 3 Novem­ber 2020. It pro­vi­des for the imple­men­ta­ti­on of the Digi­tal Ser­vices Direc­ti­ve through new pro­vi­si­ons in the Ger­man Civil Code (BGB).

Broad scope of application

Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327 (1) BGB-RefE, the new­ly intro­du­ced pro­vi­si­ons only app­ly to con­su­mer con­tracts that invol­ve the pro­vi­si­on of digi­tal con­tent or digi­tal ser­vices (so-called digi­tal pro­ducts). Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327 (2) sen­tence 1 BGB-RefE, digi­tal con­tent is data that is crea­ted and pro­vi­ded in digi­tal form. Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327 (2) sen­tence 2 BGB-RefE, digi­tal ser­vices are initi­al­ly ser­vices that enable the con­su­mer ‘to crea­te, pro­cess or store data in digi­tal form or to access such data’ or ‘to share data uploa­ded or crea­ted in digi­tal form by the con­su­mer or other users of the rele­vant ser­vice or to inter­act with such data in other ways’. This com­pa­ra­tively broad scope of appli­ca­ti­on is initi­al­ly rest­ric­ted by Sec­tion 327 (6) BGB-RefE, which cla­ri­fies, among other things, that the new pro­vi­si­ons do not app­ly to other ser­vice con­tracts, even if the entre­pre­neur pro­vi­des them using digi­tal forms or means. Con­tracts for elec­tro­nic com­mu­ni­ca­ti­on ser­vices, tre­at­ment con­tracts, gambling ser­vices, finan­cial con­tracts and cer­tain con­tracts for the pro­vi­si­on of soft­ware, digi­tal con­tent or infor­ma­ti­on are also excluded if cer­tain con­di­ti­ons are met. Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327a (1) sen­tence 1 BGB-RefE, the new pro­vi­si­ons also app­ly to so-called packa­ge con­tracts, which, in addi­ti­on to the pro­vi­si­on of digi­tal pro­ducts, also cover other con­trac­tu­al con­tent, such as the pro­vi­si­on of non-digital ser­vices. As a rule, howe­ver, the new pro­vi­si­ons only app­ly to the digi­tal part of the con­tract in the­se cases.

Pro­vi­si­on gene­ral­ly wit­hout delay

Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327b (2) BGB-RefE, the con­su­mer may demand the pro­vi­si­on of the digi­tal pro­duct imme­dia­te­ly after con­clu­si­on of the con­tract if no devia­ting pro­vi­si­on has been agreed in the con­tract or ari­ses from the cir­cum­s­tances. In this case, the entre­pre­neur must per­form imme­dia­te­ly. Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327b (3) BGB-RefE, digi­tal con­tent is dee­med to have been pro­vi­ded as soon as it has been ‘made available or acces­si­ble to the con­su­mer direct­ly or by means of a faci­li­ty desi­gna­ted by the con­su­mer for this pur­po­se’. In this case, it is suf­fi­ci­ent for the con­su­mer to recei­ve ‘the appro­pria­te means for access or down­load’. Con­se­quent­ly, suc­cessful pro­vi­si­on does not depend on the con­su­mer actual­ly down­loa­ding digi­tal con­tent. The same appli­es to digi­tal ser­vices pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 327b (4) BGB-RefE; here, too, acces­si­bi­li­ty is decisi­ve. If the entre­pre­neur is obli­ged by the con­tract to pro­vi­de seve­ral indi­vi­du­al digi­tal pro­ducts, the pro­vi­si­ons on pro­vi­si­on pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 327b (5) sen­tence 1 BGB-RefE app­ly to each indi­vi­du­al pro­vi­si­on. If the con­tract sti­pu­la­tes that pro­vi­si­on must be per­ma­nent, the con­tent must be acces­si­ble throug­hout the enti­re pro­vi­si­on peri­od (Sec­tion 327b (5) sen­tence 2 BGB-RefE). If the com­pa­ny fails to com­ply with the pro­vi­si­on obli­ga­ti­on after a request by the con­su­mer, which may also be dis­pensable, the con­su­mer may ter­mi­na­te the con­tract in accordance with Sec­tion 327c (1) BGB-RefE. Com­pa­nies are the­r­e­fo­re well advi­sed to adapt their tech­ni­cal capa­ci­ties in such a way that the pro­vi­si­on of digi­tal pro­ducts is always pos­si­ble wit­hout rest­ric­tion. In this con­text, par­ti­cu­lar con­side­ra­ti­on should be given to miti­ga­ting peak loads or cyber attacks on avai­la­bi­li­ty, e.g. through dis­tri­bu­ted deni­al of ser­vice (DDoS).

Defects in digi­tal con­tent and update obligation

Sec­tion 327d BGB-RefE obli­ges the entre­pre­neur to pro­vi­de the con­su­mer with a digi­tal pro­duct that is free of pro­duct and legal defects within the mea­ning of Sec­tions 327e to 327g BGB-RefE. Digi­tal pro­ducts are thus sub­ject to dif­fe­rent requi­re­ments for defects than con­ven­tio­nal pro­ducts, who­se defi­ni­ti­on of defects is regu­la­ted in Sec­tions 434 ff. BGB. Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327e (1) BGB-RefE, a digi­tal pro­duct is free of pro­duct defects if ‘at the rele­vant time […] it meets the sub­jec­ti­ve requi­re­ments, the objec­ti­ve requi­re­ments and the requi­re­ments for inte­gra­ti­on’. When this is the case in detail is defi­ned in more detail in Sec­tion 327e (2) ff. BGB-RefE. In this respect, com­pa­nies must adapt to a com­ple­te­ly new defi­ni­ti­on of defect and meet signi­fi­cant­ly more requi­re­ments than has been the case to date. Ano­ther new fea­ture is that, accor­ding to Sec­tion 327f (1), a digi­tal pro­duct must be pro­vi­ded with updates, inclu­ding secu­ri­ty updates, for a cer­tain peri­od of time. Con­su­mers must be infor­med of the avai­la­bi­li­ty of new updates. The dura­ti­on of the update obli­ga­ti­on depends on the pro­vi­si­on peri­od in the case of the per­ma­nent pro­vi­si­on of digi­tal pro­ducts and, in all other cases, on the reasonable expec­ta­ti­ons of the con­su­mer. As a result, com­pa­nies may have to pro­vi­de updates for signi­fi­cant­ly lon­ger than has been the case to date. The new regu­la­ti­on is also likely to bring about signi­fi­cant chan­ges in the way secu­ri­ty vul­nerabi­li­ties are handled.

Rights rela­ting to defects expi­re after two years

If the­re is a defect, the con­su­mer has a right to sub­se­quent per­for­mance in accordance with Sec­tion 327i BGB-RefE and, if fur­ther con­di­ti­ons are met, a right to ter­mi­na­te the con­tract, redu­ce the pri­ce or cla­im dama­ges. Like most ‘clas­sic defects’, the­se claims expi­re after two years in accordance with Sec­tion 327j BGB-RefE. In the case of per­ma­nent pro­vi­si­on, the peri­od beg­ins at the end of the pro­vi­si­on peri­od; in all other cases, it beg­ins with the pro­vi­si­on its­elf. The draft bill also pro­vi­des for new pro­vi­si­ons regar­ding the rever­sal of the bur­den of pro­of with regard to the exis­tence of a defect. Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327k (1) BGB-RefE, it is gene­ral­ly assu­med that the digi­tal pro­duct was alre­a­dy defec­ti­ve if the defect beco­mes appa­rent within one year of its provision.

Data pro­tec­tion impli­ca­ti­ons for the contract

Sec­tion 327q (1) BGB-RefE cla­ri­fies that data pro­tec­tion decla­ra­ti­ons made by the con­su­mer or the exer­cise of data sub­ject rights, e.g. to infor­ma­ti­on pur­su­ant to Art. 15 GDPR, do not in prin­ci­ple have any influence on the vali­di­ty of the con­tract after its con­clu­si­on. Howe­ver, Sec­tion 327q (2) BGB-RefE pro­vi­des that the entre­pre­neur may ter­mi­na­te the con­tract with the user wit­hout obser­ving a noti­ce peri­od if the user revo­kes their con­sent or objects to the fur­ther pro­ces­sing of their per­so­nal data. Howe­ver, this only appli­es if, ‘taking into account the scope of data pro­ces­sing that is still per­mis­si­ble and weig­hing up the inte­rests of both par­ties, the entre­pre­neur can­not reason­ab­ly be expec­ted to con­ti­nue the con­trac­tu­al rela­ti­onship until the agreed end of the con­tract or until the expiry of a sta­tu­to­ry or con­trac­tu­al noti­ce peri­od’. Howe­ver, claims for com­pen­sa­ti­on by the entre­pre­neur due to the exer­cise of data pro­tec­tion rights are excluded under Sec­tion 327q (3) BGB-RefE.

Recour­se in the sup­p­ly chain is possible

Sec­tion 327u BGB-RefE con­ta­ins a pro­vi­si­on that, like Sec­tion 445a BGB, allows recour­se in the sup­p­ly chain. Accor­ding to Sec­tion 327u (1) BGB-RefE, com­pa­nies can demand com­pen­sa­ti­on from their dis­tri­bu­ti­on part­ner for expen­ses if the dis­tri­bu­ti­on part­ner was respon­si­ble for the fail­ure to pro­vi­de the goods. The cla­im expi­res within six months pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 327u (2) BGB-RefE. In this case, the dis­tri­bu­ti­on part­ner can­not invo­ke agree­ments that devia­te from this to the detri­ment of the com­pa­ny pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 327u (4) BGB-RefE. Fur­ther­mo­re, cir­cum­ven­ti­on of the pro­vi­si­on is declared inad­mis­si­ble. Even com­pa­nies that do not pro­vi­de digi­tal pro­ducts to con­su­mers but are mere­ly dis­tri­bu­ti­on part­ners are the­r­e­fo­re indi­rect­ly cover­ed by the new regu­la­ti­ons and should the­r­e­fo­re fami­lia­ri­se them­sel­ves with them.

New types of contracts

With the imple­men­ta­ti­on of the Digi­tal Con­tent Direc­ti­ve, a who­le series of new pro­vi­si­ons are also being added to the BGB. Sec­tion 516a BGB-RefE stan­dar­di­ses a con­su­mer con­tract for the dona­ti­on of digi­tal pro­ducts, and Sec­tion 548a BGB-RefE regu­la­tes the ren­tal of digi­tal pro­ducts. Sec­tion 650 (2) BGB-RefE also crea­tes a new ‘con­su­mer con­tract for the pro­duc­tion of digi­tal pro­ducts’, which is to exist in par­al­lel to con­tracts for work and ser­vices if a spe­ci­fic result, such as the pro­duc­tion of digi­tal con­tent, is owed.

A lot of work for affec­ted companies

Given the con­sidera­ble scope of the new regu­la­ti­on, com­pa­nies have a lot of work ahead of them. For suc­cessful imple­men­ta­ti­on, it is essen­ti­al to first exami­ne exact­ly what requi­re­ments the new regu­la­ti­ons place on the respec­ti­ve pro­duct and which pro­ces­ses need to be chan­ged. In this con­text, it may also be neces­sa­ry and sen­si­ble to review and amend exis­ting con­tracts or their tem­pla­tes. A dia­lo­gue with dis­tri­bu­ti­on part­ners about the new regu­la­ti­on and its requi­re­ments should also be initia­ted. Com­pa­nies should not put off the neces­sa­ry steps due to the scope of the regu­la­ti­on. Alt­hough the minis­try initi­al­ly cal­led on experts and asso­cia­ti­ons to com­ment on the published draft (PDF) when it was released, it is fore­seeable that the Digi­tal Con­tent Direc­ti­ve will in any case be trans­po­sed into Ger­man law. Con­se­quent­ly, alt­hough details of the new requi­re­ments may still chan­ge, the broad frame­work has long been established.

back

Stay up-to-date

We use your email address exclusively for sending our newsletter. You have the right to revoke your consent at any time with effect for the future. For further information, please refer to our privacy policy.