Frankfurt 
Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court: Julia Neigel Prevails over Musical Competitor
Who Incorrectly Claimed to Be “Co-Producer” of the Recording “Schatten an
der Wand” (Case No. 6 U 168/23)
The renowned singer Julia Neigel, whom we represented in these legal proceedings, achieved a significant success before the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court (Case No. 6 U 168/23). The central issue was whether a musical competitor was entitled to rights as a so- called “co-producer” of the single recording of the well-known song “Schatten an der Wand.” This ruling provides clarity in a disputed area of copyright and competition law and is of great importance for the music industry.
The Dispute
The plaintiff, our client Ms. Julia Neigel, sought a court declaration that the defendant has no rights whatsoever as a “co-producer” of the music recording “Schatten an der Wand.” The background to this dispute is the defendant’s claim that he contributed to the production of the song as a co-producer. He prominently advertised this claim on his website under the section “Works as Producer/Co-Producer.”
Ms. Neigel pointed out that the essential production of the track was carried out exclusively by her and her then-partner, in a rehearsal room and at her private apartment in Ludwigshafen. The later studio sessions merely added elements such as overdubs and choral vocals. In our view, the defendant’s assertion that he was a co producer was untrue and adversely affected both Ms. Neigel’s rights and her professional reputation.
The Legal Arguments
We based the lawsuit primarily on copyright claims. We argued that the defendant’s claim of co-production could create rights that would undermine Ms. Julia Neigel’s own exploitation rights. In particular, if his contention had been accurate, the defendant might have been able to assert rights as a performing artist under Sections 73 ff. of the German Copyright Act (Urheberrechtsgesetz, UrhG).
Additionally, the plaintiff invoked competition law claims under Section 9 of the German Act Against Unfair Competition (Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb, UWG). The false statement constitutes a misleading commercial practice under Section 5(1) UWG and is therefore deemed unfair competition. Since the defendant also competes commercially with the plaintiff, his portrayal infringes on her legitimate interests.
The Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court’s Ruling
The Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court ruled entirely in favor of Julia Neigel. The court found the declaratory action to be both admissible and well-founded. It held that the defendant has no rights whatsoever as a co-producer of the single recording “Schatten an der Wand.”
Admissibility of the Action
The court emphasized that our lawsuit was admissible because the plaintiff had a legitimate legal interest in clarifying that the defendant has no rights. The defendant’s assertion might otherwise enable him to claim rights that could impede the re-release of the album “Schatten an der Wand” by a new record label.
Examination of the Defendant’s Alleged Rights
The Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court conducted a detailed examination of whether the defendant’s purported involvement in the production could entitle him to rights as a performing artist or co-producer. It applied Sections 73 ff. of the German Copyright Act in its assessment. The court clarified that a performing artist is someone who has a direct influence on the artistic interpretation of a work. Mere technical or organizational
contributions do not suffice to establish rights under the Copyright Act. Even according to the defendant’s own statements, there was no evidence that his contribution was of the required artistic quality. Rather, his alleged activities were purely technical in nature.
No Presumption of Rights for the Defendant
The court also dismissed the defendant’s attempt to rely on a supposed presumption under Section 10(1) of the German Copyright Act. Such a presumption requires that the activity in question be clearly designated as a protectable artistic contribution (for example, in a booklet accompanying the released recording). This was not the case here.
Significance of the Judgment
This ruling by the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court sends a powerful message to the music industry. It underscores that rights as a co-producer cannot be established merely through an individual’s claim. Anyone seeking to assert rights as a performing artist or producer must demonstrate and prove that their contributions were instrumental in shaping the artistic interpretation of the work and thus meet the requirements of copyright law. In this case, there was no defining involvement by the defendant as a co-producer in the recording of “Schatten an der Wand.”
For Julia Neigel, the ruling is an important step in securing her rights as the producer and rights holder of “Schatten an der Wand.” It also clarifies that unfounded claims regarding involvement and rights can constitute unfair competition and may be pursued legally.
Conclusion
This case highlights the importance of clear legal frameworks and transparent documentation in music production. Musicians and producers should clearly define their respective roles and rights to avoid disputes. The judgment of the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court offers valuable guidance and reinforces the rights of those who genuinely contribute to the creative production of a work.
If you have any questions about similar legal matters or require legal advice in the areas of copyright and competition law, we are here to assist. Feel free to contact us to effectively protect your rights.