The Supreme Court held that pictures of tryptic paintings, as copyrightable artistic works, cannot be used as decoration of shops and on online catalogues without the authorisation of the owner of the copyright in those paintings.
On the 13th March 2015, the President of the Brussels French speaking Court of First Instance pronounced a judgment to the detriment of Sabam, an important collective management organisation in Belgium. In 2011 Sabam decided to claim a fee from Internet access providers in exchange for a licence which allows these providers to communicate copyright protected works to the public (see here). I shall first discuss the control on the pricing system set up by Sabam. I shall then study how electronic communication law’s notions were used to define the scope of this pricing system. A final discussion will be dedicated to the rest of the procedure in this case setting the Belgian State against Sab [...]
The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the main public funding agency in the country, has been enforcing already for a few years an Open Access (OA) policy for the dissemination of the results of the research that it finances (both publications and data). The NWO does not mandate a specific form of OA: Green is as good as Gold! But the practical implementation of the Green Road is, as often the case, subject to the capability of individual authors to secure the right to deposit their article in an institutional repository, once they have transferred their rights to a publisher.
For an equally long period of time the Dutch legislator has been engaged in a process to am [...]
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 21st of October 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its order in a preliminary ruling procedure (C-348/13), which was referred to the CJEU by the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in May 2013. As yet, only the German and French language version of the order have been published.
The case concerned the question whether a website operator who embeds copyright protected videos in his website by framing technology infringes the copyright on these videos. Does framing constitutes a (yet unknown kind of) communication to the public pursuant to Art 3(1) InfoSoc-Directive (2001/29/EC)? Like th [...]
“A take-down notice which generically refers to the titles of the infringing videos, without specifically indicating their URLs, is not sufficient to determine the “actual knowledge” of the hosting provider.”
On May 5, 2014, the Distric Court of Turin has given a preliminary ruling on the proper content of the take-down notices in copyright infringement disputes. Although the decision is not completely surprising (see, in this regard, this ruling of the Distric Court of Rome, 11 July 2011), it sets the standard for copyright holders on how to draft a take-down notice to be notified to a ISP.
The action has been brought by Delta TV, an Italian company which produces and d [...]
“According to Art. 13 of the German Copyright Act (“CA”) the author has the right to be identified as the author of the work. He may determine whether the work shall bear a designation of authorship and which designation is to be used.”
The District Court of Cologne (Landgericht Köln) apparently never sleeps. After its somewhat questionable role in a surge of so called Redtube warning letters which infested some 10.000 unsuspecting German internet users in December 2013, the Court surprises both internet users as well as the legal community with a judgment (LG Köln, judgment of 30.1.2014, 14 O 427/13) on the moral right of recognition of authorship (Art. 13 Copyright Act) and its [...]
The long-awaited judgment of the CJEU in the Svensson case, judgment of 13 February 2013 in (C-466/12).
The legal definition of internet links has been a widely-discussed subject in recent times, pitting those who consider links an act of communication to the public within the meaning of article 3.1 of Directive 2011/29/EC (Directive of the Information Society) against those who, on equally justifiable grounds, argue that the creation of internet links does not, strictly speaking, constitute an act of communication to the publi [...]
The Court of Justice delivered its highly anticipated decision on linking. A breath of relief is allowed: linking seems to be legal. But when one looks a little closer, disturbing things begin to emerge.
First things first. The decision in Case C‑466/12, resulting from a request for a preliminary ruling from a Swedish court (Nils Svensson and others v Retriever Sverige AB) comes to the conclusion that providing on a website a link to another website, where a copyright work is “freely available”, does not constitute an ‘act of communication to the public’ in the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmon [...]
“For the ECJ, in the meaning of Article 5(3) of the Regulation 44/2001, a harmful event may arise from the possibility of obtaining a reproduction of a work from an internet site accessible within the jurisdiction of the court seised.”
In its judgement Pinckney v. KDG Mediatech AG of 3 October 2013 (case C-170/12), the European Court of Justice answered a request for a preliminary ruling from French Supreme Court, concerning the interpretation of Article 5(3) of the Regulation 44/2001 on jurisdiction and recognition, which provides that “A person domiciled in a Member State may, in another Member State, be sued (…) in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict, in the courts fo [...]