Blog as a means of coercion violates right of personality

When a blog that damages honour is 'dedicated' to a person and this blog is used as a means of coercion, this constitutes a violation of the right of personality, ruled the Federal Court of Justice (BGH).

An investor brought legal action against a blog operator for violation of the right of personality. The investor took action against a blog concerning him that the operator maintained.

The investor held interests in numerous companies. In 2006, the blog operator acquired shares in a public company in which the investor had an interest. By the end of 2014, the share price of the company had fallen below 0.01 euros. In December 2014, the company's board of directors requested revocation of the stock exchange listing. In press reports, the company was described, inter alia, as 'Germany's biggest destroyer of capital'.

Since 2010, the blog operator maintained the website www.aktienversenker.de in the form of a blog. Posts were published here under the full name of the investor with the title 'All About the Company Raider T[…] W[…] [Investor] and O[…] K[…]'. In the posts, the investor was repeatedly referred to as 'company raider', 'stock exchange fraudster' or 'stock exchange failure'.

The investor took the view that this reporting served exclusively as a means of coercion in the context of extortion. This was because the blog operator had offered him on several occasions to cease or stop operating the blog in exchange for payment. Whereupon the investor brought an action, inter alia, for injunctive relief.

However, the lower court rejected this action for injunctive relief. In the course of the appeal on points of law, the BGH now had to decide.

BGH: Blog used as a means of coercion

The BGH (Judgment of 29.06.2021, Case No. VI ZR 52/18) found a violation of the right of personality and ordered the blog operator to cease the conduct.

The judges made clear that the investor was affected by the blog in his honour, which is also protected under the general right of personality. The designation alone as 'company raider' was damaging to reputation. Likewise, the connection drawn between the term 'aktienversenker' on the one hand and the investor on the other.

The same applied to the assessment expressed both in the blog headline 'All About the Company Raider T[…] W[…] [Investor] and O[…] K[…]' and in the number of subsequent posts, to the effect that there was much negative to say about the investor.

The BGH further pointed out that an interference with the right of personality is only unlawful if the protected interest of the affected party outweighs the legitimate interests of the other side. The balancing of interests was decided in favour of the protection of the investor's honour in relation to the freedom of expression of the blog operator. This held true in particular against the backdrop that the operation of the blog served (also) as a means of coercion for an attempted extortion to the detriment of the investor.

Conclusion

If a blog that damages honour is 'dedicated' to a person and this blog is used as a means of coercion in the context of extortion, this may constitute a violation of the general right of personality.