EU Court Rules VPNs Are 'Lawful Technical Tools' in Landmark Copyright Case

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has handed down a landmark judgment that explicitly classifies Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) as 'lawful technical tools' and sets new boundaries for online copyright enforcement. The ruling, issued in July 2026, emerged from a dispute over the online publication of Anne Frank's manuscripts.

At the heart of the case: a coalition of Dutch and Belgian academic institutions published a free scholarly edition of Anne Frank's diary. Copyright status varies by territory — in Belgium and roughly 60 other countries the writings are public domain, but in the Netherlands parts remain protected until 2037. The publishers hosted the site in Belgium and deployed geo-blocking to deny access from Dutch IP addresses. Visitors from the Netherlands saw a notice explaining the restriction.

The CJEU held that as long as a website uses 'state-of-the-art' geo-blocking technology, the publisher cannot be held liable for copyright infringement simply because a user employs a VPN to bypass the restriction. Crucially, the court rejected the argument that the mere existence of VPNs renders a website's security measures ineffective.

The ruling confirms that copyright holders cannot point to VPN availability to claim a website's geo-blocking is inadequate. More significantly, the court firmly rejected the demonization of privacy software, cementing the legitimate status of VPN providers across the EU.

This decision provides legal clarity for VPN providers and users alike: using a VPN to access publicly available content is not inherently unlawful, and providers are not liable for how users employ their tools. The burden remains on copyright holders to implement effective geo-blocking if they wish to restrict access by territory.