This provision retroactively validated private copying levies that had been paid or claimed based on rates annulled by the French Council of State. To fully understand the ruling of the Constitutional Council, it is necessary to explain the background of this provision.
Back in 2008, the Private Copying Commission (Commission pour la rémunération de la copie privée) set new levy rates in its Decision No. 11. On 17 June 2011, the Council of State annulled that decision on the grounds that products acquired by professionals for a pu [...]
On 13 September 2012, three months after the first ruling in a case opposing the French TV channel, TF1, to YouTube, the Paris Court of First Instance (Tribunal de Grande Instance) issued a second judgment in a case opposing the same TV channel to Dailymotion. The facts of the two cases are quite similar but the conclusions of the Court differ. In the first case, the Court dismissed the TF1′s claims (copyright and related rights infringements) although the Court acknowledged the liability of YouTube for the late removal of duly notified infringing content. In the second case, not only did the Court find Dailymotion liable but the Court also sanctioned the platform by awarding a substantial a [...]
In 2010 Google was sued by the French recording industry trade association (SNEP) for copyright and neighbouring right infringements via its service Google Suggest. The Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal both rejected the claims. They found that Google had not infringed any copyright by suggesting websites to Internet users when they were typing their requests. Only the use of the files available on the suggested websites could have been infringing. The plaintiff had originally requested the Court of First Instance [...]
Lower courts have shifted from a notice and take down rule (provided by the e-commerce Directive and the LCEN) to a notice and stay down rule (created by the judges). This interpretation was confirmed in 2011 by the Paris Court of Appeal. However, on 12 July 2012, the Court of Cassation put an end to this judge-made law by issuing its eagerly awaited position on that issue.
July has been a busy month for the French Supreme Court. On 12 July 2012, the Court of Cassation issued four interesting decisions. The three first ones relate to the obligations of online intermediaries concerning subsequent publications of infringing materials and will be the topic of this blogpost; whereas the fourth d [...]
“No obligation of monitoring subsequent publications is inscribed in the law; however French Courts have a tendency to impose such an obligation on hosting providers shifting from a notice and take down rule to a notice and stay down rule.”
On 29 May 2012, the Paris Court of First Instance (Tribunal de Grande Instance) issued a lengthy decision in a case opposing TF1, a French TV channel, to the platform YouTube for copyright and related rights infringements, trademarks infringements as well as unfair competition/parasitic behaviour. The procedure started in 2008 before the Tribunal of Commerce, which rejected the claims for lack of jurisdiction. The case was then referred to the Court of Fi [...]
On 5 April 2012, the French Court of Cassation stayed of proceedings in a copyright infringement case opposing a French songwriter to an Austrian CD manufacturer and referred preliminary questions to the CJEU on the interpretation of Article 5 (3) of Regulation 44/2001 (on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters).
At national level, a songwriter and performer discovered that his songs had been reproduced, without his consent, on a CD printed in Austria. The CDs were then offered for sale on different websites by UK companies. In October 2006, the songwriter and performer sued the Austrian manufacturer before the Court of First Instance in [...]
In this period of French presidential campaign, the HADOPI law has become a popular and recurrent topic. Most of the candidates have expressed an opinion (more or less constant) on the future of the law (whether to amend it, replace it, abrogate it or keep it as it is). This blog is certainly not the appropriate forum to discuss their proposals, which are in any case and at this stage more slogans than concrete proposals. However, the HADOPI law and its acronym authority have also made the headlines of specialized information websites for other reasons. One of them concerns the launch of the last stage of the graduated response with the transmission of the first complaints against Internet [...]
On 9 February 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued its judgment in the case Martin Luksan v. Petrus van der Let (Case C-277/10) opposing a film director to a film producer on the exploitation rights of the film “Fotos von der Front”. The case was brought by the Wien Handelgericht (Commercial Court of Vienna) for a preliminary ruling on the issues of exploitation rights vested in film producers and right to fair compensation.
At national level, Mr. Luksan and Mr. van der Let had signed an agreement through which Mr. Luksan agreed to write a script and direct a film documentary on German photography war during WWII and Mr. van der Let to produce and exploit the film. The [...]
A new proposal of law on the digital exploitation of (commercially) unavailable books of the 20th Century (proposition de loi relative à l’exploitation numérique des livres indisponibles du XX° siècle) has been introduced quasi-simultaneously in the Senate and in the National Assembly.
According to the preamble of the proposal, about 500 000 books published during the 20th Century are out of print (for commercial and economic reasons) and only available in libraries. To ensure their dissemination, their digitisation becomes necessary. However, a major uncertainty subsists concerning their copyright status and ownership. Most of the publishing contracts, which are granting rights of exp [...]
On the 24th and 25th of May, the French President Nicolas Sarkozy convened a forum on the future of the Internet, the e-G8 Forum, two days before the Meeting of the leaders of the G-8. This forum was intended to prepare the G-8 communiqué on the measures that Governments should adopt to protect children online, enhance online privacy and fight digital copyright piracy.
But even before the Forum had started, a draft communiqué had leaked in the New York Times and raised some concerns among civil society representatives that feared that the message would strongly support more regulations to the detriment of the freedom of expression and right of privacy. One cannot but notice that during th [...]