In its recent judgment in EAÜ v MTÜ Safari Seiklused (the “Safari” case), the Estonian court held that where a person has signed a licence agreement with an authors’ collecting society, with the intention of using the rights of authors commercially for a public performance, they must unquestioningly fulfil all of the terms of that agreement. According to the licence agreement signed between an Estonian concert organiser, MTÜ Safari Seisklused, and the Estonian Authors’ Society (EAÜ) the amount of the licence fee did not depend on how many authors EAÜ in fact represents. Therefore, although in this case EAÜ represented only one author from three whose works were being played publicl [...]
In a decision that could have serious implications for websites providing real time streaming of free to air broadcasts, the English Court of Appeal has recently handed down its Judgment in the case of ITV Broadcasting Limited and others v TV Catchup Limited and others  EWCA Civ 204. The outcome is that the action brought by a number of British free to air broadcasters (ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5) against TV Catchup, an internet TV streaming service, has been referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “CJEU”) for a second time.
Readers may remember that this case has already been referred to the CJEU (Case C-607/11), who held that the concept of c [...]
Regular readers of this blog will be familiar with an earlier decision by the Slovak Supreme Court about unauthorised use of a famous Tank Man picture in the Slovak media. The case has now hit the Slovak Constitutional Court, thus providing it with the first ever opportunity to discuss the interface of copyright and freedom of expression. And it is very interesting reading.
Some background first. In 1968, when Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia following the Prague Spring, the Tank Man picture was splashed across the front page of major newspapers globally. It was taken by a young photographer, Ladislav Bielik, and showed a bare-chested man in front of the occupiers’ tank who was ready to be sho [...]
On 26 March, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down Case C-279/13 C More Entertainment, the latest decision regarding the right of communication to the public in the context of websites providing links to content. In this particular case, C More provided live broadcasts of ice hockey matches on the Internet for payment of a fee. The defendant created links on its website to the C More live broadcasts and circumvented the paywall thus allowing its users to have live access to the broadcasts.
When the case of C More was initially referred, the fashionable focus on the nature of internet hyperlinks was in full swing. There were already pending references for Svensson [...]
On 5 March 2015, the Spanish National High Court convicted the administrators of the website Youkioske of an aggravated intellectual property offence and of promoting and establishing a criminal organisation. The judgment can be deemed ‘historic’ since it is the first time that the operators of a downloads site have faced a penalty of this magnitude – no less than 6 years’ imprisonment, a fine equivalent to a period of 20 months at a rate of 10 Euros per day, disqualification from operating websites professionally for a period of five years and the attachment of the almost 200,000 Euros that had been made from the unlawful activities. It does not end there, however, for the guilt [...]
On 1 May 2015 a new, second, ‘anti-piracy’ law  will take effect in Russia. This law amends the provisions on preliminary interim blocking injunctions for intermediaries introduced by the first anti-piracy law, which took effect on 1 August 2013.
In the opinion of this blogger, the new law, like its predecessor, will barely affect internet piracy in Russia. It is not a secret that both providers and consumers of pirated content are well equipped to circumvent the injunctions. But what about the ordinary internet users, i.e. innocent website owners? The provisions of both anti-piracy laws are so ambiguous, and procedures for introducing and enforcing injunctions are so straightforward [...]
On June 24, 2014, the Austrian Supreme Court ruled that the Austrian internet service provider UPC Telekabel Wien GmbH must block access to copyright infringing websites. The Supreme Court noted that, in accordance with the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-314/12, such an injunction leaves its addressee to determine the specific measures to be taken in order to achieve the result sought. This way the internet service provider can choose to put in place measures which are best adapted to the resources and abilities available to him and which are compatible with the other obligations and challenges which he will encounter in the exercise of his activity.
Please click here to find US copyright cases from the U.S. Supreme Court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals with a detailed summary of each case.
Recently added from our US IP Law Daily service:
Gaylord v. U.S., United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, No. 2014-5020, 4 February 2015
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that $540,000 was a reasonable royalty for the United States to pay on infringing commemorative stamps that the U.S. Postal Service had sold to collectors (Gaylord v. U.S., February 4, 2015, Taranto, R.). The stamps were created to commemorate the service of Korean War veterans, but they in [...]
In this judgment, the French Supreme Court ruled that an author who is a member of a collecting society may not take action in infringement cases to protect his economic rights, except in the case of a deficiency on the part of said collecting society.
In the same judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that publishing agreements for the assignment of rights of an author must be in writing, and it is not possible to demonstrate the existence of an agreement by reference to the behaviour of the authors as regards the exploitation of the work.
In a case concerning the use of a radio set in a small bike shop, the Constitutional Court ruled that in order to assess whether a user is making a communication to the public, the situation of the specific user and of all the persons to whom he communicates the protected works must be assessed.