No erotic mementos

As a matter of principle, a former partner is entitled to keep photographs or films of the other person taken during the relationship even after the relationship has ended. However, does this also apply to erotic and intimate recordings? The Higher Regional Court (OLG) Koblenz has now ruled on this matter.

Following the termination of their relationship, a dispute arose between the ex-partners, inter alia, over the use of numerous image and film recordings, including intimate recordings that had been made by 'her' during the relationship and provided to 'him' in digitalized form. After the man had already undertaken to refrain from making the recordings accessible to third parties or the public, the dispute also concerned whether and to what extent the provided files containing his own photographic and video recordings were to be deleted.

The Regional Court (LG) Koblenz had already ordered the man to completely delete the electronic reproductions of intimate recordings of his ex-girlfriend in his possession. Insofar as the woman had furthermore claimed the complete deletion of any recordings showing her, the action was dismissed by the Regional Court. Both ex-partners appealed against this judgment of the Regional Court.

Court decision

By means ofjudgment of 20.05.2014 – Az. 3 U 1288/13the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Koblenz upheld the preceding decision of the Regional Court in full.

The court established that while the woman had consented to the creation and use of the photographs, insofar as these were intimate recordings, her consent was limited in time to the duration of the relationship existing between the parties.

Consent could thus be revoked if, due to changed circumstances, precedence is to be given to the general personal rights of the person concerned over the fact that she consented to the creation of the recordings at some point in time. According to the Higher Regional Court (OLG), this applies after the termination of the relationship if the recordings are intimate and thus relate to the core area of personal rights.

The woman's interest in deleting the recordings, relating to the core area of personal rights, was to be rated higher in this case than the man's property right in the existence of the recordings.

However, according to the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Koblenz, the right to delete digital photographs and video recordings is limited to this area. For, unlike intimate recordings, photographs showing the woman in clothed state in everyday or holiday situations were less likely to be suitable for damaging her reputation with third parties. It is generally customary for persons who are permitted to have recordings made at celebrations, festivities and on holiday to possess and use them permanently. With regard to such recordings, therefore, there is no claim against the ex-partner for deletion.

Conclusion

It remains to be seen whether the judgment will become final and binding and whether possibly other courts will also adopt the view expressed by the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Koblenz in this regard. Regardless, one should always carefully consider what recordings one grants consent for and to whom one then provides them.