Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The United Kingdom Parliament late last night approved a controversial digital economy bill that allows the court to impose obligations on internet service providers to limit internet access of its users deemed to have infringed online copyrights.
Lassi Jyrkkiö writes: Anything one can consider as politically cool from an EU perspective, ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, the multilateral treaty to combat counterfeiting and piracy) negotiations have got it all: the internet, the USA, large potential for media exposure and a hitherto Nixonian element of secrecy balanced by a flow of thrilling documents leaked by generous deep-throats.
The truth about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is different depending on which side you are on.
The European Court of Justice’s recent ruling in Google v. Louis Vuitton Malletier SA has been hailed a major legal victory for Google and other search providers. That, however, is only part of the story.
“No changes in domestic” law promised the partners currently negotiating the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. A leaked 56-page recent consolidated version of the much-discussed agreement shows that this might not be completely true. The draft version with a lot of bracketed text in it shows that some countries are more open about the potential need to change their domestic laws than others.
The recent Forest Group case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has made it more financially viable for plaintiffs to sue for under the false marking patent statute (35 U.S.C. § 292). However, legislation currently before Congress, as well as another patent marking case to be decided by the CAFC in the near future, Pequignot v. Solo Cup, may level the playing field more towards defendants in such lawsuits.
European Union copyright law needs to be amended so that the clearance of copyrights is simplified for online content, the European Broadcasting Union said today. The group presented the results of an analysis it conducted today at the European Parliament in Brussels.
Reactions have emerged since last week’s release by United States Senate Judiciary Committee bipartisan leaders of details of compromise legislation to reform of US patent laws. Most are generally positive, signalling that a long-sought compromise might be near, but strong reservations remain among some stakeholders.
Electronics manufacturers are taking legal action against users in the United States who communicate how to unlock or “hack” hardware devices. However, manufacturers’ use of their hired legal guns to crack down on hacking, which they say infringes on their intellectual property ownership rights, is a point of debate.
United States Senate Judiciary Committee bipartisan leaders today released details of much-anticipated compromise legislation aimed at reform of US patent laws. The new bill ostensibly makes significant steps toward resolving longstanding differences in legislative efforts to modernise US law for patent quality and efficiency, and make it more compatible with international laws.