The ongoing design duty in Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd Casting the scope of copyright infringement even wider

The Australian Federal Court case of Universal Music AustraliaPty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd (‘Sharman’)¹is the latest in a series of peer-to-peer (P2P) filesharingcases from various jurisdictions that has found the softwaredistributor/technology provider liable for copyright infringement.² Sharman followed a few months after the groundbreaking US SupremeCourt case of MGM Studios v Grokster Ltd ³ (‘Grokster’)that had acknowledged the Sony safe harbour for technology providersbut also introduced an inducement of infringement doctrine todeal with reprehensible conduct of infringers. While both cases involved similar technology and shared a numberof similarities on the facts and legal principles⁴, a closerexamination of Sharman shows that the net of copyright infringementin P2P filesharing is cast wider than that in Grokster. The effect of Sharman is an increased burden on the technologyprovider and the potentially tremendous consequences on innovationdue to the lack of a clear safe harbour as well as the wideningof the design obligation.     

行政侵权责任及其确认

行政侵权责任表明一种损益性的行政法律责任,是行政致害行为的法律后果。行政侵权责任作为一种事后调整机制,是对公权力行为的否定和对其损害的补救。行政侵权责任是一种行政主体对受害人承担的以利益给付为主要内容的行政法责任,这一责任的实现需要以其责任的确定为前提。行政侵权责任的确认是行政侵权责任成立的基点,是行政侵权救济的前置程序。     

Experimental use and patent infringement in Europe

Bird & Bird's Trevor Cook has produced another thoroughand insightful analysis, this time on the important area ofdefences to patent infringement for research activities in Europeand, in particular, the UK. The work, published both as a Report of the Intellectual PropertyInstitute and, in abbreviated form, in the Intellectual PropertyQuarterly, assesses historical and international perspectiveson defences for experimental or private uses and regulatoryreview. It analyses, in turn, the consequences for failing     

Study on copyright infringement of video-sharing websites

If any video-sharing websites, without authorization, directly upload film and television works to a server to be shared by subscribers, and do editing and verification in advance on the infringing videos uploaded by subscribers, it is regarded as “direct infringement.” However, the overwhelming majority of video-sharing websites provide information platforms for subscribers to automatically upload videos, and in such case, how to determine the tort liability of those websites remains ambiguous. The Regulations on Protection of the Right of Communication through Information Network of China impose harsh liabilities on video-sharing websites by incomplete reference to the US “vicarious liability,” consequently hampering the development of normal business. It shall be reasonably identified whether the operator of a website “should have known” there exist infringing videos uploaded by subscribers according to the “Red Flag Test,” in reference to the columns set by the video-sharing website. In condition that a mature and effective filtering technology has been accepted by the market, it shall be taken as the subjective fault for a video-sharing website to refuse shielding the uploading of infringing videos with such technology.     

'Piracy' provisions under the Enforcement Directive and patent infringement

The Court of Genoa has issued its first decision on the applicationto patent infringement of the remedies introduced by Directive2004/48 on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights,dismissing the appeal filed by Princo against a precautionaryseizure order over its movable and immovable property issuedby a judge of the Genoa IP Chamber on the grounds that the patentinfringement was committed intentionally and on a commercialscale.     

The extension of territorial waters

The oceans once belonged to everyone and to no one. Freedom of the seas served the world well for ages. But this anarchic principle is now hopelessly inadequate given the present environmental crisis involving massive water pollution and widespread extinction of marine species. The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea （UNCLOS） is all bark and no bite. Other international organizations are similarly ineffective including the International Whaling Commission, International Maritime Organization, and the International Seabed Authority. And regional bodies such as the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas and the Antarctic Treaty System are not much better. So, at least temporarily, it is up to coastal nations to police the waters of the world. The United States, as a superpower, should lead the way. The unilateral extension of U.S. territorial waters will enhance the prospects not only for environmental protection but also economic development and national security. It will also encourage other nations to do the same.     

论侵害债权制度

我国合同法并未规定侵害债权制度,但是侵害债权的现象在社会生活中是客观存在的,而且在理论上也是成立的。合理适用该制度有助于保护债权人利益,维护交易安全,减少不正当竞争行为,因此,有必要构建合理的侵害债权制度,以达到债权人、债务人、第三人之间的利益平衡。     

Trade mark invalidated on ground of copyright infringement

The Registrar of Trade Marks ordered invalidation of a registeredtrade mark that was a copy of the whole of the applicant's mark‘MAX BRENNER & Device’, where use of the disputedmark was liable to be prevented by the applicant's earlier copyrightunder the provisions of the Copyright Ordinance.     

Copyright infringement and potential technological prevention measures in UK universities

Sony Music v. Easyinternetcafe´ 1 Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd, Sony Music Entertainment Inc., Polydor Limited, UMG Recordings Inc. and Virgin Records Limited (claimants) v. Easyinternatcafe Ltd [2003] EWHC 62 (Ch) in the High Court of Justice Chancery Division 28 January 2002. Case No: HC 02 C01798. View all notes has introduced a new facet to the debate concerning the copyright legality of peer-to-peer file transfer. The judgment and subsequent settlement has highlighted that companies offering services that are used to infringe copyright may be held to account in the UK courts. Liability may extend from the private to the public sector and the British Phonographic Industry (BPI)2 The action was supported by the BPI's international sister organization: The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). View all notes has reinforced this theme recently. In March 2003 every university in Britain received a letter pointing out the legal risks of universities acting as copyright infringement facilitators. By allowing students to download copyright material such as software, Mp3s and DVDs, universities and their vice-chancellors may face injunctions, damages, costs and potential criminal sanctions. This paper first, briefly reviews the history and literature concerning peer-to-peer file sharing and secondly provides a preliminary discussion of the heads of peer-to-peer copyright infringement liability with regard to UK universities. Although the law at present gives no clear precedent in regard to the university sector, the area is unlikely to remain static. It is feasible that student copyright infringement liability could be transferred to universities in the future if universities do not show due diligence when dealing with copyright infringement. Thirdly this paper outlines the technological and administrative actions that may be taken to satisfy the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) and other copyright holders that UK universities are showing due diligence in preventing student copyright infringement. It is proposed that the university sector will follow the Internet service providers (ISPs) and will begin to work with the collecting and enforcement societies to prevent copyright infringement, perhaps in a similar way to the operation of the Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA). This article puts forward two main reasons for this: First, to avoid the potential legal costs of a copyright infringement action and secondly as the majority of downloading of copyrighted Mp3s, DVDs and computer software does not constitute an academic pastime or fulfil any worthwhile university endorsed learning aims it should be actively discouraged.3 Certain limited peer-to-peer use may fulfil legitimate educational goals: This area in the UK is governed by the Copyright, Design and Patents Act of 1998 in sections 28–44. View all notes     

Scientia potentia est: Making threats of copyright infringement

There has been much debate in the UK as to whether copyright law should have an unjustified threats provision similar to that found in UK patent, trade mark, and registered design law. Unjustified threats provisions for copyright law exist in other commonwealth jurisdictions, such as Australia and India. We argue that all of the existing unjustified threats provisions in the UK are too narrow in their scope. Threats more generally have played a significant role in the development of copyright law, and a provision aimed at ‘unjustified’ threats may paradoxically restrict discourse about the scope of copyrights. We therefore suggest that the best way to proceed is not just to introduce an unjustified threats provision but instead to make clearer what is, and is not, protected by copyright.     

广州中院审理MTV著作权侵权纠纷案件若干体会

从2003年权利人向卡拉OK经营者主张MTV作品著作权使用费的第一件案件获得法院支持后,境外唱片公司(多为香港公司)在大陆地区各大城市掀起了维权活动的高潮。广州市中级人民法院在2004年、2005年两年间共受理此类案件13件。境外唱片公司的这种维权行动,触动了国人尚未觉醒的神经。虽然人们从报刊杂志近年有关播放背景音乐需缴费的报道中隐约觉察到“免费午餐”的     

域外侵犯商业秘密司法保护的比较与借鉴

商业秘密是一种重要的知识产权,能够给权利人带来经济利益和竞争优势。纵观当今世界各国对商业秘密保护的法律手段,主要集中在民事和行政手段上,而刑事手段作为“最后的防线”,也被越来越多的国家所采用。本文通过对域外主要国家侵犯商业秘密司法保护的比较,发现其共同和相异之处,以探讨对我国商业秘密保护的启示。     

Demonstrating 'use' of an earlier registered mark in CTM opposition proceedings

An earlier registered trade mark may serve to oppose a laterapplication to register a Community trade mark, notwithstandingthat the earlier mark is not used in the form in which it isregistered, so long as the actual use had not destroyed thedistinctive character of the earlier mark.     

著作权侵权案件中权属的认定——女子十二乐坊著作权纠纷案评析

有法谚云：案例是法律的细胞。法治的完善、法学的进步,离不开法官对这些鲜活案例和司法实践的探索与思考。2009年本刊将与北京市高级人民法院、上海市高级人民法院、广东省高级人民法院的知识产权审判庭合作开办“审判前沿”栏目,主要刊载知识产权法官对最新知识产权案例的研究与评析,以期展示三地推动知识产权审判实践的新进展、新动向、新成就,为全国知识产权审判实践和法学研究提供学术引导和审判参考。     

All talk and no bite: Copyright infringement and piracy trends in India

The Copyright Act 1957 presents the face of modern copyright protection afforded to different intellectual works and is a key statement of intellectual property rights (IPR) in the Indian legislation governing this domain, as well as being compliant to the TRIPS Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. This Act has been acceptably referred to on many occasions on global platforms, on account of its being one of the most elaborate and well-structured pieces of legislation in the field of intellectual property law. However, this well encompassing, highly creditable and widely acknowledged legislation seems to fall down in its practical implementation rendering its theoretical purpose partly futile. The situation so stands, that India continues to project major piracy rates with little regression in the trend despite the fact that this law is still very much in force. The reasons which deny effective copyright protection in India, for works of miscellaneous categories, have much to do with the lack of an equally strong enforcement mechanism. This paper provides an insight into the inadequacies of the Indian legal and administrative systems which have ultimately diminished the effectiveness of the copyright regime contrary to that envisioned by the law.     

Weighing the parody factor in a trade mark infringement and dilution case

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court'sdecision that Haute Diggity Dog's (HDD) parody pet toys of famousbrands was not likely to cause confusion with those of LouisVuitton Malletier's (LVM) products. LVM's copyright, trade markdilution, and other claims were also rejected.