CRA-ADC

Litigation

in cra-briefings35 · March 01, 2006

RIM

On March 3, Research in Motion and NTP Inc. settled a long-festering patent dispute for $612.5 million. The payment includes settlement of the action as well as a perpetual licensing fee for all future use of technology that may be covered by NTP patents. This settlement will allow the continued production and marketing of the popular blackberry service by Research in Motion. For more information on the settlement see : www.rim.com/news/press/2006/pr-03_-3_2006-01.shtml

AGENCE FRANCE PRESS BACK in COURT with GOOGLE

Agence France Press (AFP) has long asserted that it has a copyright interest in its headlines. In light of this, AFP has brought legal action against Google asserting that Google’s indexing service relies on these headlines and is therefore an infringement of AFP’s copyright. Google has argued that headlines, like titles, names and slogans are not protected by copyright and would better be covered by trademark. Though this case is in its early stages the court is set to determine if headlines are copyrightable. A finding that they are could be a huge blow to indexing services on the Internet like Google. For more information on this case see the E-Commerce Law Daily Vol.11 No.3, BNA.

ARTIST TAKES ON AMAZON

Can one man take on Amazon for alleged copyright infringement? In the statement of claim it has been alleged that Amazon has infringed the copyright of reclusive cartoonist, Robert Crumb, by using his character from Zap Comix and the slogan “Keep On Truckin’” when the service is unable to locate a product the customer is looking for. Though Amazon reportedly discontinued use of this material when contacted by Crumb’s lawyers, the lawsuit will be heard at the US federal court in Seattle. For more information on this case see the Globe and Mail December 28, 2005.

THUMBNAIL IMAGES HAVE LICENSING VALUE

Perfect 10, an adult website, recently sought and obtained an injunction against Google’s image search service for the use of thumbnail copies of Perfect 10’s images in its web browsers. Though the injunction does not, in and of itself, determine the legality of this use of poor quality images, it does indicate that this kind of use could be considered a violation of copyright law. Justice Howard Matz of the United States District Court in Central California held that the injunction should be granted because the use of the thumbnail images undercuts Perfect 10’s ability to license the images. Critics have suggested that this case may have significant implications for other cases that have been brought against Google’s book search service. This decision went against an earlier ruling of the United States Court of Appeal (9th Circuit) in Kelly v. Arriba Soft, wherein it was held that the use of thumbnails in image search functions did not violate the copyright of the producer of the original work. Google had relied on this case in its defense. The distinction between these two cases is the argument about the commercial value and thus the licensability of the work, an argument that could work in favour of other authors and publishers fighting with Google. The full text of this decision can be found at http://i.i.com.com/enwk.ld/pdf/ne/2006/googleperfect10.html

NEW CHALLENGES WITH KAZAA

The case brought by several music labels and industry associations in Australia against Kazaa continues to work its way through the appeal process in Australian courts. At issue in the appeal is whether or not Kazaa “authorized” infringement. Sharman Networks, the owners of Kazaa, are appealing the original decision on points respecting the need to install piracy filters. John Ireland, counsel for Kazaa, has argued that the business model of Kazaa was not to provide unlicensed content and therefore it should not be held liable for authorizing copyright infringement. For more information on the status of this case see http://australianit.news.com.au