Referral C-30/26 (SHR Germany, 26 Jan 2026)

Does the sharing of an existing post on a social network which, taken in isolation, infringes copyright, constitute an act of communication within a functionally connected social media platform? In order to constitute an act of communication, is it sufficient to establish links within the platform (that is to say, not on different websites) that result in posts from one account being displayed in other accounts or in other groups or similar?
When a post is shared in which protected subject matter is exploited without the copyright holder’s authorisation, is it relevant whether the new post with the shared content is not specifically directed at a ‘new public’ on the ground that (1) the public represents all the users of the platform or (2) the original post was available to all users of the platform, but the shared post is displayed only to a small number of platform users in a group with restricted access?
Are the principles from the Court’s judgment of 8 September 2016, GS Media BV v Sanoma Media Netherlands BV and Others, C-160/15 EU:C:2016:644, in particular the rebuttable presumption of knowledge of illegality when there is a profit-making purpose, also transferable and applicable to the sharing of existing posts on social networks (in this case, Facebook)?
If the third question is answered in the affirmative: Does the fact that a social media account is not used exclusively for business purposes, but partly for business and partly for private purposes make any difference for the purposes of assessing its profit-making purpose? Must the profit-making purpose result from the specific post on the platform and what criteria support the application of the presumption provided for in the third question referred?
If, in the light of the foregoing questions, no communication to the public were to be assumed, could such a communication to the public result from the fact that the user sharing the content had ‘appropriated’ the shared, infringing content, for example through approval, praise or other agreement with the content of the original post, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, for example by a separate ‘Drüberkommentar’ (comment added to the post)?
In summary: In circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, does the sharing of a post already existing on a social network, which, taken in isolation, infringes copyright, constitute an autonomous communication to the public pursuant to Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC?
In circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, does the sharing of a post already existing on a social network, which, taken in isolation, infringes copyright, and which results in a new post containing the original post being visible in another part of the platform (for example, in an own account or in a Facebook group) until the original post is deleted or access to it is restricted constitute reproduction pursuant to Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC?