The Supreme court of Bulgaria held that the term “unless agreed otherwise” in Art. 42 (2) of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights should be interpreted as meaning that the parties to an agreement commissioning the creation of a work can agree either in the commissioning agreement or in another agreement on specific terms…
The CJEU considered that where the operator of a rehabilitation centre installs television sets at its premises, to which it transmits a broadcast signal thereby enabling patients to view television programmes, and this affects the copyright and related rights of a wide range of interested parties, it must be determined whether such a situation constitutes…
In a judgment of 17 March 2016, the Cour de cassation, the French Supreme Court, ruled that the judicial courts are required to assess and award the remuneration for private copying in situations where one of the decisions of the Commission in charge of setting the fair compensation has been annulled. A full summary of…
In this decision, the CJEU tackled an international jurisdiction issue, since what was essentially under debate in the main proceedings was the applicability of Article 5(3) of Regulation 44/2001 on jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters, which enables, in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict, persons domiciled in one Member State to be sued…
The French Supreme Court confirmed that a writ of summons for infringement of intellectual property rights must determine and specify the elements for which protection is sought, as well as the allegedly infringing acts. A writ of summons, such as that in the case at hand, which does not sufficiently describe or identify the work…
The court held that the defendant did not infringe the claimant’s copyright or database rights beyond the infringements already admitted, as none of the defendant’s customers apart from one had access to the claimant’s software. A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law
The CJEU has recently ruled on yet another case seeking to determine the meaning of ‘communication to the public’, this time in the context of broadcasting television to patients in a rehabilitation centre (Reha Training Gesellschaft für Sport- und Unfallrehabilitation mbH v Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte (GEMA), C-117/15). Readers will be aware…
1 Background, facts and questions On 9 June 2016 the CJEU ruled on Case C-470/14 – EGEDA and Others (‘EGEDA’). This marks the tenth occasion on which the Court has ruled on the private copying exception or limitation in Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29/EC (the ‘InfoSoc Directive’) after Padawan, Stichting de Thuiskopie, Luksan, VG Wort,…
A magistrate judge properly ruled that a property owner who had intentionally burned a replica of a 16th-century Spanish galleon—a work of art that two plaintiffs had constructed over a used school bus for a Nevada arts festival—did not violate the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco has…
In a judgment of 17 March 2016, the Cour de cassation, the French Supreme Court, ruled that the judicial courts are required to assess and award compensation for private copying in situations where a decision of the Commission in charge of setting the fair compensation has been annulled. This judgment seems to mean that the…
