HP 2014 Annual Report Download - page 165

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
Note 15: Litigation and Contingencies (Continued)
the German Federal Supreme Court decision and remitted the matter to it. On July 21, 2011, the
German Federal Supreme Court stayed the proceedings and referred several questions to the CJEU
with regard to the interpretation of the European Copyright Directive. On June 27, 2013, the CJEU
issued its decision responding to those questions. The German Federal Supreme Court subsequently
scheduled a joint hearing on this matter with other cases relating to reprographic levies on printers and
PCs that was held on October 31, 2013. The German Federal Supreme Court issued a decision on
July 3, 2014 partially granting the claim of VG Wort. The German Federal Supreme Court decision
provides that levies are due where the printer is used with a PC to make permitted reprographic copies
in a single process under the control of the same person, but no levies are due on a printer for
reprographic copies made with a ‘‘scanner-PC-printer’’ product chain. The case has been remitted to
lower courts to assess the amount to be paid per printer unit.
In September 2003, VG Wort filed a lawsuit against Fujitsu Technology Solutions GmbH
(‘‘Fujitsu’’) in the Munich Civil Court in Munich, Germany seeking to impose levies on PCs. This is an
industry test case in Germany, and HP has agreed not to object to the delay if VG Wort sues HP for
such levies on PCs following a final decision against Fujitsu. On December 23, 2004, the Munich Civil
Court held that PCs are subject to a levy and that Fujitsu must pay A12 plus compound interest for
each PC sold in Germany since March 2001. Fujitsu appealed this decision in January 2005 to the
Munich Court of Appeals. On December 15, 2005, the Munich Court of Appeals affirmed the Munich
Civil Court decision. Fujitsu filed an appeal with the German Federal Supreme Court in February 2006.
On October 2, 2008, the German Federal Supreme Court issued a judgment that PCs were not
photocopiers within the meaning of the German copyright law that was in effect until December 31,
2007 and, therefore, were not subject to the levies on photocopiers established by that law. VG Wort
subsequently filed a claim with the German Federal Constitutional Court challenging that ruling. In
January 2011, the Constitutional Court published a decision holding that the German Federal Supreme
Court decision was inconsistent with the German Constitution and revoking the German Federal
Supreme Court decision. The Constitutional Court also remitted the matter to the German Federal
Supreme Court for further action. On July 21, 2011, the German Federal Supreme Court stayed the
proceedings and referred several questions to the CJEU with regard to the interpretation of the
European Copyright Directive. On June 27, 2013, the CJEU issued its decision responding to those
questions. The German Federal Supreme Court subsequently scheduled a joint hearing on that matter
with other cases relating to reprographic levies on printers that was held on October 31, 2013. The
German Federal Supreme Court issued a decision on July 3, 2014 partially granting the claim of VG
Wort. The German Federal Supreme Court decision provides that levies are due for audio-visual
copying of standing text and pictures using a PC as the last device in a single reproduction process
under the control of the same person, but no levies are due on a PC for reprographic copies made
using a ‘‘PC-printer’’ or a ‘‘scanner-PC-printer’’ chain. The case has been remitted to lower courts to
assess the amount to be paid per PC unit.
Reprobel, a cooperative society with the authority to collect and distribute the remuneration for
reprography to Belgian copyright holders, requested by extra-judicial means that HP amend certain
copyright levy declarations submitted for inkjet MFDs sold in Belgium from January 2005 to December
2009 to enable it to collect copyright levies calculated based on the generally higher copying speed
when the MFDs are operated in draft print mode rather than when operated in normal print mode. In
March 2010, HP filed a lawsuit against Reprobel in the French-speaking chambers of the Court of First
Instance of Brussels seeking a declaratory judgment that no copyright levies are payable on sales of
MFDs in Belgium or, alternatively, that copyright levies payable on such MFDs must be assessed based
157