Art. 11 EnforD – Page 2

Posted in Art. 11 EnforD, Art. 8(3) InfoSoc, CJEU, EU, in rem injunctions, innocent parties injunctions

AG: Website Blocking Is Compatible With The Union Law

Advocate General Pedro Cruz Villalón just published his opinion in UPC Telekabel Wien C‑314/12 case. He concludes that in principle website blocking is permissible injunction against an innocent intermediary. Because the opinion is not yet available in English, I summarize below only some points, that I found to be the most important: § 59: the

Injunctions Outside of Tort Law?

Thanks to crowd funding call orchestrated by Jeremy and several extraordinary people from around the world (some of them anonymous), to whom I am greatly indebted for their spontaneous support, I will be able to share one of my recent work-in-progress papers with audience at INTA next week in Dallas. The working version of the

What’s Wrong With UK Website Blocking Injunctions?

British courts issued already three website blocking injunctions against five copyright-infringing websites (Newzbin II. + 1 , Dramatico Entertainment + 1 , EMI Records ). In this blog post I don’t want to question the effectiveness of the remedy for copyright cases as I did before (see also J Arnold’s opinion in EMI

Posted in Art. 11 EnforD, Art. 8(3) InfoSoc, CJEU, EU, website blocking

My Slides on Website Blocking [Cyberspace]

As promised to some of you, I am sharing my slides from the talk on ‘Website Blocking’ I had in Brno this weekend. The paper is still in the process, but feel free to approach me if you have any comments or

Is There Any Union Wide Secondary Liability?

In course of preparing my notes for the lecture on ‘Website blockig’, which I will hold in Brno in two weeks at Cyberspace conference, I bumped to several interesting things, which provoked the question formulated in the headline of the article. ‘Is There Any Union-wide Secondary Liability?’ Firstly, let me explain what I mean when

Posted in Art. 11 EnforD, Art. 14 EcomD, Art. 8(3) InfoSoc, BGH, DE, hosting, Liability of ISPs

BGH on Liability of Rapidshare

BGH today according to its press release decided in Atari Europe v. Rapidshare, known also as “Alone in the dark” (BGH, I ZR 18/11, LG Düsseldorf – 12 O 40/09). The case concerns action brought by Atari Europe, the producer of well-known computer game “Alone in the dark”, against the file-hosting provider Rapidshare. As the

Posted in Art. 11 EnforD, Art. 8(3) InfoSoc, CJEU, EU, injunctions, ISP, website blocking

New CJEU Referral: Is Website Blocking OK with Union Law?

E-comm blog reports a new exciting Austrian referral (OGH decision) before CJEU, which deals with the question whether the Union law provides for website blocking injunctions against Access Providers. The case UPC Telekabel Wien C-314/12 is already listed on the Curia website and has a potential to solve a vast disagreement of EU courts on

Frisdranken Case: Another Bit on ´Intermediary Non-use´ of the Trade Mark

Today, the Court of Justice of the European Union decided very interesting trade mark case – Frisdranken Industrie Winters BV C-119/10, which deals with the question of whether intermediary companies, such as a service provider who, under an order from and on the instructions of another person, fills packaging which was supplied to it by

Thanksgiving gift from Luxembourg – Sabam!

Huťko is very happy to inform you that the Court of Justice of the European Union just rendered its superb decision in Sabam C‑70/10. Not only it is favorable to “internet freedoms”, but to Huťko’s great surprise, it is also based on different, but even better reasoning (the court actually discussed the balance between IP-rights

Hidden Gems of L’Oreal v. eBay

Some of you might be wondering why Huťko did not report on two most interesting CJEU cases of this beautiful summer – L´Oréal v. eBay C-324/09 and Interflora C-323/09. The main reason is the complexity of said cases. Summing them up in two separate articles would be just not enough to cover everything. And after