Jurisdiction in Keyword Advertising Disputes After Wintersteiger

Keyword advertising raises interesting questions beyond the run-of-the-mill trademark infringement and unfair competition issues typically discussed. For instance, if a sponsored ad can be clicked in three separate countries, can the Courts of each of those countries take jurisdiction to hear and determine a dispute? The Court of Justice of the European Union has given a strange answer to this question, which you’ll probably want to know about if you, or your competitors, do any business online. Read more »

UsedSoft v. Oracle article published by Society for Computers and Law

I’m really pleased to have had my review of the Court of Justice’s seminal UsedSoft v. Oracle decision published by the prestigious Society for Computers and Law.  Click the image to go there.

Gareth Dickson's article for Society for Computers and Law on Software Copyright in UsedSoft v. Oracle

I’m really pleased to have had my review of the seminal UsedSoft v. Oracle published by the prestigious Society for Computers and Law

Some recent trade mark articles

Further to my copyright post here, I’ve set out below a list of recent trade mark articles and quotes, with links where possible.  A list of my recent copyright publications is here, and there’s a full list of all publications here.

Some recent copyright articles

I haven’t been able to write here for some time, but I have been writing elsewhere.  Here’s a list of my recent copyright articles, with links.  A list of my recent trade mark publications is here, and there’s a full list of all publications here.

YouTube Loses Again

Below is a Google translation of the Hamburg District Court’s press release of today, when YouTube was found liable for copyright infringement. I haven’t proof read it yet, so it might not make much sense… Read more »

Red Flag

Appeals Court Sides With Viacom, Dismisses YouTube Summary Judgment Claim

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has just delivered its Opinion in Viacom v. YouTube, and it has held, unanimously, that YouTube is not entitled to summary judgment on Viacom’s $1bn copyright claim.  The decision reverses the Southern District of New York’s finding that YouTube didn’t need to go to trial to determine whether it was entitled to safe-harbor protection under the DMCA.

The decision is below.  Commentary will follow in due course.

Viacom v. YouTube – Second Circuit Opinion

Pin banner

Pinterest’s New Terms Expand Indemnity, Ban Commercial Use, Prevent Users Suing Cold Brew Labs

On Saturday, March 24, 2012, Pinterest emailed users to say it was updating its Terms of Service.  Make no mistake – this is a pretty significant re-write, and kudos to Pinterest for making both sets readily available so we can compare and contrast them.  The “proposed” terms come into effect on April 6, 2012 and while they attempt to bring clarity, there are areas that will concern Users, particularly if they are artists themselves.

Key points.

  1. The controversial Indemnity language has been expanded, not limited.
  2. Commercial use of the Site is now banned completely.
  3. Users must forfeit their rights to fair use of Pinterest Content, but User Content is fair game.
  4. Users cannot sue Pinterest, either individually or as part of a class action.
  5. There are some hints at the future innovations.

Read more »

New Year fireworks

Happy New Year!

New Year fireworksA quick note to mark the passing of 2011 and the start of 2012. Thank you all for reading and commenting here (and on Twitter) on the stories that have been reported on these pages. I’m looking forward to posting much more in 2012.

There has been plenty to contemplate in the last 12 months and we look forward to new challenges and opportunities in the months that lie ahead.  Several big IP cases look likely to make their mark next year, including Viacom v. YouTube, The Authors’ Guild v. Google and NLA v. Meltwater, and we may begin to see the fallout of the (UK) Supreme Court’s ruling that foreign copyright claims can be adjudicated in the English courts.

Whatever plans you have for next year, I hope they will be realized, that you enjoy the chase, and that you will be challenged by the work that you do.

Streaming Is Not Renting

Silicon Valley DVD-rental company Zediva has suffered a major blow to its business, which is on the wrong end of an injunction from the District Court in Los Angeles.

Zediva was sued by the MPAA for the unauthorized streaming of movies after it began taking “rental” orders for DVDs which its employees would pick off a shelf and stream online to the customer that had “rented” it.   That way, argued Zediva, it was only providing a physical rental, which doesn’t require permission provided that the physical copy being rented has been lawfully made and purchased.  The parties have settled the dispute, but not on terms that will please Zediva’s investors, with the result that if Zediva wants to continue streaming movies it will have to obtain streaming licenses, and, presumably, compensate the movie studios for past infringements.

None of this is surprising, and this is the only conclusion the Court could have reached.  No doubt, though, there will be some tough questions being asked by Zediva’s investors.

Movie studios win lawsuit against Zediva.

Red Flag

Viacom Counters YouTube’s “1-in-a-billion” Red Flag and “Unlimited Storage” Arguments

Red flag, or  is it?

YouTube admitted that it could be a flag, but said only Viacom could confirm its color

YouTube does not cite the relevant DMCA language in its latest series of arguments because it has no answer to it, according to the reply letter brief filed yesterday in the Second Circuit by Viacom and The Football Association (et al.).   In October, the parties in Viacom’s $1bn copyright lawsuit against YouTube for historic infringements of its audio-visual works were ordered by the Court to submit further arguments on: 1) whether “storage” under the DMCA includes syndicating files to third parties on commercial terms; and 2) how knowledge of “specific” URLs can be mandated in the DMCA’s “red flag” regime, and they have now completed their filings (here and here).  Viacom is seeking reversal of a 2010 decision in which District Judge Louis L. Stanton, sitting in the District Court for the Southern District of New York, sent Viacom’s lawsuit to the cutting room floor without a trial.

The briefs make for interesting reading, and this was certainly Viacom’s most aggressive submission to date.  There was plenty in both sides’ filings that I have not found persuasive, or have wholeheartedly disagreed with, but two points have clearly come out.   Read more »