Monitoring References to the Court of Justice of the European Union
Tag
17 case reports
A Hungarian publisher says Google's chatbot reproduced its articles — once when the model was trained, again when it answered. Google says a model that predicts the next word copies nothing. The first reference on generative AI and copyright asks the Court which of them is right.
On 12 June 2018 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2018:423) that a mark consisting of a colour applied to the sole of a shoe is not a sign consisting "exclusively of the shape" within Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of the Trade Marks Directive — the red sole is principally…
By judgment of 20 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:790) the Court held that the terms of protection in the Term Directive do not apply to copyright that had been extinguished before 1 July 1995, and that EU law does not preclude national legislation under…
On 14 June 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:456) that the operators of The Pirate Bay themselves make a communication to the public by indexing and managing torrents of protected works, despite the content sitting on users' machines.
By judgment of 16 November 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:878) the Court held that the French scheme licensing digital exploitation of out-of-print books precluded authors' exclusive rights: consent may sometimes be implicit, but only where every author is actually…
On 10 November 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:856) that the public-lending exception can cover the lending of e-books on the one-copy-one-user model, digital lending being within the Rental and Lending Directive.
By judgment of 29 October 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:735) the Court held that geographical data extracted from a topographic map retain sufficient autonomous informative value to be "independent materials", so a map can constitute a database within the Database…
By judgment of 22 September 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:717) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “EU law, in particular Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of…
By judgment of 9 June 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:418) the Court held that fair compensation for private copying may not be financed from the general state budget in a way that cannot ensure the cost is ultimately borne by the users of the private-copying exception.
By judgment of 12 November 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:750) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 13 May 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:315) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 4(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and…
On 11 September 2014 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2196) that Member States may permit libraries to digitise works in their collections in order to make them available at dedicated terminals, even where the publisher offers licence agreements.
On 3 September 2014 the Grand Chamber ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2132) that parody is an autonomous concept of EU law with only two essential characteristics: it evokes an existing work while being noticeably different from it, and it constitutes an expression…
By judgment of 5 March 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:144) the Court accepted that private-copying levies may be charged on multifunctional media such as mobile-phone memory cards, subject to a battery of conditions: harm above a minimal threshold, no levy where…
By judgment of 11 July 2013 (ECLI:EU:C:2013:515) the Court held that indiscriminately levying blank media placed on the market for business purposes is permissible only if the scheme provides an effective and non-excessive right to reimbursement; a…
On 10 April 2014 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:254) that the private-copying exception does not cover reproductions from unlawful sources, and that levy systems must not factor unlawful copying into the fair compensation collected from everyone — a Dutch…
By judgment of 3 October 2013 (ECLI:EU:C:2013:635) the Court held that in online copyright cases Article 5(3) of Brussels I gives jurisdiction to the courts of a Member State which protects the copyright relied on and where the website is accessible — no…