When a company owns the Benelux rights in the design of a chair but then it fails to maintain the registration of its Benelux rights under Benelux law, can a rival company still be stopped from making similar chairs because of the links between the old Benelux law and current EU law? More specifically, what is the relationship between Benelux rights and the EU’s ‘term of protection’ Directive 93/98/EEC?
Continue readingTag Archives: copyright
Case C-24/16, Nintendo – jurisdiction by design
Nintendo is suing companies in the German courts for the alleged infringement of its design rights. However, the German courts wonder if they have jurisdiction to decide the case and the scope of any measures they might impose. The first problem is that the German defendant is only a subsidiary and its parent company is domiciled in France. The second problem is that although the defendant’s website has images on it that correspond to Nintendo’s design rights, these have been put there so that consumers know immediately that the defendant’s goods can be used in Nintendo’s games consoles.
Continue readingCase C-610/15, Stichting Brein – seeking website blocks to stop peer to peer technology
People may use telecoms networks to pass information to each other. Some websites such as that run by The Pirate Bay allow people to download software that enables them to pass small pieces of information around a telecoms network. The question in this case is whether a Dutch court can order telecoms companies to block their customers’ access to websites like The Pirate Bay in order to stop presumed copyright infringement from taking place.
Continue readingCase C-174/15, Vereniging Openbare Bibliotheken – ebooks via Dutch public libraries
Like public libraries the world over, Dutch libraries lend materials from their collections to the public. However, those materials may be protected by copyright. Consequently, Dutch law requires Dutch libraries to pay money to the copyright holders every single time a book is lent. The legal question in this case is whether that obligation extends to an ‘e-book’, and the answer depends on the word ‘lending’ in the EU’s ‘rental and lending rights’ Directive 2006/115/EC.
Continue readingCase C-160/15, GS Media – Porn! Hyperlinked and Hyperleaked!
“Porn! Hyperlinked and Hyperleaked! Dutch Supreme Court Stymied! And now the EU Law Radar Report all you IP lawyers have been waiting for” Click for
Continue readingCase C-484/14, McFadden – a mere conduit?
If a person offers non-password-protected access to the Internet, and an unknown user passes a piece of copyright-infringing music over that Internet connection, then can the person offering the Internet access be absolved of legal liability on the basis that he is but a ‘mere conduit’ under the EU’s ‘E-Commerce’ Directive 2000/31/EC?
Continue readingCase C-470/14, EGEDA – will a state-financed ‘private copy’ scheme deliver fair compensation?
According to Article 5(2)(b) of the EU’s InfoSoc Directive 2001/29/EC, copyright holders can be paid ‘fair compensation’ for the copies of protected works made by people for private use. In some Member States this type of scheme is financed by levies on electronic equipment. However, Spain has decided to pay right holders directly from the state budget. Spanish copyright ‘collecting societies’ do not like this, and claim that the scheme contravenes EU law.
Continue readingCase C-325/14, SBS Belgium – broadcasting via third parties
Some broadcasters no longer broadcast directly to the public. Instead, a broadcaster will supply their channels and programming output to ‘distributors’ such as the cable, telephone, and satellite TV companies. Subscribers to the services provided by these distributors can then watch the broadcaster’s output. This does however generate a question of copyright law. Namely, for the purposes of the EU’s InfoSoc Directive 2001/29/EC, who is making a ‘communication to the public’? Is it the broadcaster? Or is it the distributor? Or could it be both?
Continue readingCase C-41/14, Christie’s France – the single market in reselling art works ‘Going! Going! Gone!’
When original works of art are resold, the EU’s artists’ resale right Directive 2001/84/EC requires that a royalty is paid to the author of the work by the seller. The Directive goes on to allow either the seller or professional sellers, such as art galleries, to share the liability for paying the royalty in accordance with national law. In this case, a French auction house decided to change its terms and conditions so that the buyer, and not the seller, became liable to pay the royalty. Can contract derogate from the seller’s obligation to pay the royalty that is enshrined in the Directive?
Continue readingCase C-30/14, Ryanair – grounding a go compare an airfare website
Price-comparison websites in the EU are often lawful because the websites they take their information from are databases frequently unprotected by either copyright or the ‘sui generis’ right enshrined in the EU’s Database Directive 96/9/EC. This is true of Ryanair’s website. But Ryanair’s website is however protected by a plank of deviant Dutch ‘copyright’ law. In this case, a Dutch website that compares the price of airfares is seeking to rely on a Dutch exception to the Dutch ‘copyright’ rule, an exception that corresponds to one found in the EU’s Database Directive. The legal question has become whether the Directive applies to all databases and thus websites – even the unprotected ones – and, if so, whether the price-comparison website qualifies as a ‘lawful user’, who does not need to obtain Ryanair’s consent to use Ryanair’s website.
Continue reading