Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Did you miss the IPKat last week? Bring yourself bang up to date by browsing through the latest edition of Never Too Late (the 111th)

The branding and rebranding of infidelity

Kat readers may not recognize Avid Life Media, but they are (more) likely to be familiar with the website under which the company used to provide its services—Ashley Madison. Neil Wilkof reflects on how a brand can recover from disaster.

Do passive hosting providers commit acts of communication to the public in relation to third-party content? 

Eleonora considers this question in light of the Reha Training decision and the AG opinion in GS Media.

Is hosting providers' safe harbour the real problem of copyright owners? A new article

The Ecommerce Directive envisages 'safe harbours' that shield internet service providers (ISPs) from liability for third-party content that they transmit, cache or host. A proposal has been recently advanced in France advocating the removal – at the EU level – of the safe harbour protection for hosting providers that give access to copyright works. Eleonora considers whether this is a good plan.

SUPER-BREAKING NEWS: Leaked draft Impact Assessment shows that Commission intends to introduce new mandatory exceptions, address value gap and introduce related right for publishers

What does the EU Commission intend to propose when it releases its next copyright package next month? This is a question that has been haunting EU copyright enthusiasts (Eleonora Rosati among them) for a few months now. While we wait for the official documents, Statewatch has just leaked a draft version of the Commission Staff Working Document - Impact Assessment on the modernisation of EU copyright rules [here's the link].

Linking & Copyright rapid response event on 13 September: come join us!

Is linking to unlicensed content a potential infringement of copyright? Following the (controversial) decisions in Svensson and BestWater, we will know the answer on 8 September 2016, when the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issues its decision in GS Media, C-160/15. Come and join Elenora Rosati and other expert panellists at the London offices of Bristows to discuss the implications and enjoy some drinks and canapés. Tickets here.

Singapore Government launches public consultation on major copyright reform

Singapore is reforming its Copyright Act. Eleonora Rosati brings you the news that the government has launched a public consultation [open until 24 October 2016, 5 pm GMT+8] to seek feedback on the proposed changes. Those interested in answering the consultation can do so here.


Never too late 110 [week ending on Sunday 24 August] | Life after Cartier - the future of blocking injunctions Irish Court of Appeal ruling on Article 8(3) InfoSoc Directive | Wednesday Whimsies| Court fees - do you know what to pay? | Good news and bad news for bio-pharmaceutical patenting in the United States | HP? Hewlett Packard? The legacy of brands following a split |

Never too late 109 [week ending on Sunday 17 August] EPLAW mock trials | CJEU "flat rate" reimbursement of legal fees in C-57/15 | Transmission or retransmission? | Judgement in Actavis v ICOS | Collective management of copyright for images displayed by search engines | Corporates and #Rio2016 | Global branding

Never too late 108 [week ending on Sunday 10 August] Limerick Competition - the results | UK finally speaks out about the "facts" of IP post Brexit| Is "Deadwood really cluttering up trade mark registers? | Weekly roundup: Friday Fun 

Never too late 107 [week ending on Sunday 31 July] Article 28 declarations |Costs of ISP blocking injunctions |Friday Fantasies, featuring legal challenges to Brexit and  more |Huawei v Samsung |Hospira v Genentech |Questions on Article 3(b) SPC referred to CJEU |Book Review: Trade Secret Protection |Pokémon Go

Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Nick Smallwood on Monday, August 29, 2016 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.