In its judgment of 9 July 2026 in Anne Frank Fonds (Case C-788/24), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) clarified the conditions under which a work that has entered the public domain in certain Member States may nevertheless be lawfully published online where it remains protected by copyright in others. Such online availability is lawful provided that the website implements an effective and up-to-date geo-blocking system capable of preventing access from countries where the work continues to enjoy copyright protection, even if that system may be circumvented through the use of a VPN.
The background
In September 2021, the Anne Frank Stichting, together with other organisations, made available online, free of charge, a scholarly edition of Anne Frank’s Dutch-language manuscripts. The copyright in the work is owned by the Anne Frank Fonds and, in the Netherlands, part of those writings remains protected until 2037. In several other countries, including Belgium, however, copyright protection has expired and the work has entered the public domain.
To reflect these differences, the website prevented access from jurisdictions in which the manuscripts continued to benefit from copyright protection. The Supreme Court of the Netherlands subsequently referred to the CJEU the question whether the online publication nonetheless constituted a communication of the work to the public in the Netherlands, given that users located there could bypass the geo-blocking measures by using a VPN.
The CJEU’s ruling
The CJEU held that making a public domain work freely available online is lawful even where the work remains protected by copyright in other Member States, provided that the website employs geo-blocking measures preventing access from jurisdictions where copyright protection continues to subsist.
Accordingly, a person making such a work available online, while aware that copyright protection varies between Member States, must ensure that access is directed exclusively to users connecting from countries where the work has entered the public domain.
A geo-blocking system that reflects the current state of the art satisfies this requirement because, although it may be circumvented through the use of a VPN, it ensures free access where the work is in the public domain while simultaneously safeguarding the rights of the copyright holder in jurisdictions where protection remains in force. The mere theoretical possibility of circumventing those technical measures is therefore insufficient, in itself, to establish an unlawful communication to the public.
Liability where geo-blocking proves ineffective
The CJEU further clarified that, where geo-blocking measures fail and the work consequently becomes accessible in countries where it remains protected, liability rests with the person who made the work available online, rather than with the provider of the VPN service used to bypass the restriction.
Responsibility therefore remains with the party disseminating the content and does not extend to the provider of the technical means enabling users to connect to the website.
Why the judgment matters
The judgment is of particular significance for publishers, broadcasters, archives, libraries and foundations making digital content available across the European Union, where the duration of copyright protection is not harmonised in practice.
The CJEU delivers a clear message: the online dissemination of works that are in the public domain in part of the European Union is permissible, provided that appropriate and up-to-date technical measures are implemented to preserve digital territorial boundaries. Those planning cross-border digital distribution should therefore ensure that the effectiveness of their geo-blocking systems is both carefully implemented and properly documented, since it is the technical adequacy of those measures—not the absolute impossibility of circumventing them—that determines whether publication is lawful.
Lawyer Elisa Patrizi