 |
| These Kats are having a global encounter |
Rapid response event on CJEU YouTube/Cyando ruling
Do YouTube and cyberlocker Uploaded directly perform copyright-restricted acts? And, following from this: what is the relationship between the InfoSoc right of communication to the public and Article 17 of the DSM Directive? At what conditions is the hosting safe harbour available? And what about intermediary injunctions?
These are just some of the issues that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) addressed in YouTube, C-682/18 and Cyando, C-683/18 in its ruling on 22 June 2021.The IPKat, IFIM, and the British Literary and Artistic Copyright Association (BLACA) joined forces to host a rapid response panel discussion in the afternoon of Thursday, 1 July to analyse the content and meaning of the CJEU judgment.
Moderated by Jeremy Blum (Bristows), the panel featured copyright experts and speakers with direct knowledge of the background national and CJEU proceedings.
They were (in alphabetical order):
- Ursula Feindor-Schmidt (Lausen)
- Georg Nolte (Google)
- Lauri Rechardt (IFPI)
- Julia Reda (Gesellschaft für Freiheitscrechte)
- Eleonora Rosati (The IPKat and IFIM )
The event recording is now available on YouTube here.
Global Digital Encounters
FIDE will host the 14th iteration of its Global Digital Encounters series on 15 July 2021, on the theme of "Expanding business thanks to data economy: IP as a tool". More information and registration can be found here.
Sunday Surprises
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Sunday, July 11, 2021
Rating:
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Sunday, July 11, 2021
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html