Daimler loses dispute over illegal recordings

May a public broadcasting television company broadcast unlawfully recorded film material as part of a television documentary, or do corporate personality rights stand in the way of such use? The Regional Court (LG) Stuttgart recently had to decide this legal question.

A journalist working for SWR obtained a job at Daimler AG by means of a temporary employment agency for the purpose of conducting covert research. During his work in a Mercedes factory in Stuttgart-Untertürkheim, the journalist produced clandestine video recordings using several hidden video cameras. The clandestine recordings were then used and broadcast in a documentary produced by SWR for ARD with the title "Hungerlohn am Fließband – Wie Tarife ausgehebelt werden".

After the first broadcast, the car manufacturer protested against the highly negative report. Daimler AG took the view that the film recordings made without authorisation were unlawful and violated the corporate personality right of the company and therefore demanded that the broadcaster cease using the material.

Court Decision

By judgment of 09.10.2014 – Az. 11 O 15/14 (Press Release) the Regional Court (LG) Stuttgart dismissed the action brought by Daimler AG.

In its reasoning, the Regional Court (LG) Stuttgart held that although the production of the film material was unlawful because the journalist had violated Daimler AG's right to exclusive possession and use of its property, the report served a predominant public interest in information. The report informed the public about a deficiency which lay in the different remuneration of permanent employees and temporary workers at the automotive group. In this respect, there was therefore an overriding public interest in information. Daimler AG therefore had to accept the disadvantages resulting from the unlawful manner in which the information was obtained.

Conclusion

According to the legal view of the Regional Court (LG) Stuttgart, the use of the unlawfully recorded film material is justified by the SWR's freedom of opinion and broadcasting rights. Whether the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Stuttgart will confirm this decision remains to be seen. One may well ask whether reporting on the apparent deficiency could not have been done without the use of unlawfully obtained film material.