Swedish court finds that an embedded link to unlicensed content infringes copyright

Malovic, Nedim; Haddad, Patricia

doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpw191

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the most part, this has been the position of national courts in the aftermath of GS Media in Sweden, Germany, Czech Republic, and the UK (Brüß, , p. 165; Malovic & Haddad, ; Nordemann & Kraetzig, ; Vivoda, ) . In essence, national court decisions have predominantly converged on the broad interpretation of the for‐profit condition.…”

Section: Critique and Proposalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the end, beyond the issue of legal uncertainty, the main criticism to the broad interpretation taken by most national is that is turns the for‐profit condition into a de facto presumption (Malovic & Haddad, , p. 91). That is to say, if the website posting the link is a commercial website, then it is presumed to have posted the link for profit.…”

Section: Critique and Proposalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Untangling the hyperlinking web: In search of the online right of communication to the public

Quintais

2018

World Intellectual Property

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the online right of communication to the public under EU law and its interpretation by the Court of Justice of the EU. The focus of the analysis is on the controversial application of the right to hyperlinking, and its implications for the online activities of users and intermediaries. After outlining the international and EU legal framework on the right of communication to the public, the paper advances a conceptual framework for the interpretation of the exclusive right in the online environment, which is both based on, and attempts to bring coherence to, the Court's complex case law. On this basis, the article then explores and critically assesses the main areas of legal uncertainty for the online application of the right and the normative considerations at stake—especially fundamental rights and the promotion of technological development—offering interpretative and legislative solutions for their resolution. The article argues for abandoning the legislative proposals for a new right for press publishers and the so‐called value gap, as both are fundamentally flawed. Instead, reform should focus on redefining the right of communication to the public and preserving safe harbors, especially for hosting providers.

show abstract

Section: Critique and Proposalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Critique and Proposalsmentioning

confidence: 99%