tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post8326225652145105101..comments2024-03-19T08:36:55.274+00:00Comments on The IPKat: BREAKING NEWS: specific blocking injunctions are OK but general filtering is against EU law, says AG Cruz VillalónVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-37775140400388619552013-11-27T09:59:46.057+00:002013-11-27T09:59:46.057+00:00Fairly generous to rightsholders considering the A...Fairly generous to rightsholders considering the AG is Cruz-Villalon who seems to get all the IPR v Charter cases. Generally speaking though, the Court seems to not want undue interference with the operation of the internet -so we will see.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-21515909683595131532013-11-26T20:40:33.748+00:002013-11-26T20:40:33.748+00:00Anonymus #1:
In the AG's defense, the german ...Anonymus #1:<br /><br />In the AG's defense, the german version reads "if the answer to the first _OR_ second question is in the affirmative".<br /><br />rgds,<br />BernhardAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01251129069934090075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-69177080339176990862013-11-26T13:57:39.046+00:002013-11-26T13:57:39.046+00:00The heart of the problem in this case is the Austr...The heart of the problem in this case is the Austrian law whose compatibility with EU law (including the Charter)was under, in effect, scrutiny and which allows these broad measures ("Erfolgsverbot"). One question put to the Austrian authorities at the hearing was whether there had ever been a constitutional challenge to this law in Austria and the answer was no. However, the absence of a challenge did not mean it was not problematic. Now there is a thesis topic: the increasing role of the CJEU vs national constitutional law.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-50476396092659281042013-11-26T13:35:04.622+00:002013-11-26T13:35:04.622+00:00Why do they insist on all this "if the answer...Why do they insist on all this "if the answer to the first question is in the affirmative" nonsense when they can't even follow basic rules of logic?<br /><br />"3. If the answer to the first and second question is in the affirmative...". <br /><br />The answers can't possibly both be "in the affirmative" when the second question reads "If the answer to the first question is in the negative...".<br /><br />I worry about the state of justice in the world if our senior judges struggle to apply basic logic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-65337649972539102692013-11-26T12:42:45.176+00:002013-11-26T12:42:45.176+00:00Here you've (at least) the Press Release publi...Here you've (at least) the Press Release published by the EC in English: http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2013-11/cp130149en.pdf Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb)https://www.blogger.com/profile/05839541011000284094noreply@blogger.com