A. Introduction and Background In copyright law the term ‘communication to the public’ marks the boundary between use which has a copyright law relevance and use which does not. The interpretation of the term within EU member states is based on various EU directives. Of note however, is that the term communication to the public…

On the 7th of April AG Wathelet issued his Opinion in the GS Media case (C-160/15). The case concerned the provision by GS Media of hyperlinks that directed users to Filefactory.com, an Australian data-storage website. Users could then click on the following link, which would open a window that contained the button “DOWNLOAD NOW”. By…

IN CASES OF INFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, COMPENSATION FOR MORAL DAMAGES IS COMPATIBLE WITH PECUNIARY DAMAGES CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF “HYPOTHETICAL ROYALTIES”.  Judgment of the CJEU of 17 March 2016 in Liffers, C-99/15 BACKGROUND This CJEU decision stems from legal proceedings brought in Spain by Mr. Liffers, the director, screenwriter and producer of…

On 16 March 2016 the CJEU’s Advocate General Szpunar handed down his Opinion in case C-484/14, Mc Fadden. The case concerns the liability of Tobias Mc Fadden, the owner of a business selling lighting and sound systems in Munich. Mr Mc Fadden operates a Wi-Fi hotspot on the business’ premises, deliberately left unprotected by a…

The English High Court found that an App which allows users to upload, share and view 8 second clips of cricket matches and other sporting events (on a near-live basis) infringed the copyright in the television broadcasts of those matches, and the films made during the course of the production of those broadcasts. England And…

By Jeremy Blum and Sarah Watson, Bristows Ultrasoft Technologies Limited v Hubcreate Limited [2016] EWHC 544 (IPEC) On 16th February 2016 the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (Hacon HHJ) handed down judgment in the copyright and database right dispute between software competitors Ultrasoft and Hubcreate. The case does not cite a single other judgment regarding the…

The Supreme Administrative Court held that pursuant to § 2, para. 9 of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights (LCRR), permanent objects that represent the synthesis between architecture and other arts should be regarded as works of architecture. Under Article 12, para. 2 of the LCRR, copyright in a work of architecture, created after…

The Supreme Court held that “uses in any other manner” as provided in Article 172a, para. 1 of the Criminal Code covers any possible use of a copyright protected work. It is not necessary to refer to additional statutory rules, because “uses in any other manner” as one of the forms of unauthorised use is…