We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 32

Owner of compilation need not list individual authors to register copyright

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 29 2013

In deciding issues of first impression for the circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction against a

Collective Rights Management Directive approved

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • March 17 2014

The new Collective Rights Management Directive, regarding collective management of copyright related rights and multi- territorial licensing of

Google Books is fair use and provides “significant public benefits”

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 31 2013

Since 2004, the Google Books project has scanned over 20 million books and has provided digital copies of the books to participating libraries while

ISP not responsible for preventing illegal downloading: CJEU decision finds filtering system would infringe ISP’s business rights and customers’ freedom

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • January 12 2012

In Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL C-7010 24 November 2011, the Court of Justice of the European Union found that imposing an injunction on an internet service provider (ISP) requiring it to install a filtering system to prevent illegal downloading is unlawful under European law

The Aereo crashed: cheap internet TV thwarted

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 30 2014

The Supreme Court of the United States has now determined that internet streaming services directly infringe the copyrights of several television

“Situs of the injury” for exercising personal jurisdiction over defendant for online copyright infringement is location of copyright owner

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 29 2011

In a decision favorable to copyright owners based in the state of New York, the New York State Court of Appeals held that in copyright infringement cases involving the uploading of copyrighted literary works onto the internet, the situs of the injury for purposes of determining personal jurisdiction under New York's long-arm jurisdiction statute is the location of the copyright holder and not the location of the infringing conduct

How deep is the safe harbor?

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 30 2012

In a case that has now been in litigation for more than five years, and in an appeal that drew close to a hundred amici briefs, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has explained its position on the contours of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DCMA's) safe harbor provision that limits the liability of online service providers who permit users to post content on their websites

Searching for photos? Go ahead, Google those thumbnails

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • Germany
  • -
  • June 30 2010

The German Federal Supreme Court has decided that Google is not liable for unlawful copyright infringement for displaying thumbnail preview images of the artist's photographs in its search engine

“Hot news” cannot be enjoined under misappropriation claim

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 31 2011

In a case that attracted significant amici attention, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, invoking the copyright law principal of preemption, vacated an injunction against an internet news service that was based on a tort claim of misappropriation

Constitutional challenge to (file sharing) damage award rebuffed

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 31 2011

The U. S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit was less sympathetic than the district court to a Boston College graduate student who was found to have used file sharing software to distribute copyrighted music, concluding that the district court erred in reducing the damage award based on due process concerns