Search results : 501

In his opinion of 9 January 2014, the Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), in Case C-435/12, considered whether reproductions from unlawful sources fall within the private copying exception of Directive 2001/29/EC (Copyright Directive). A related question considered by the Advocate General, is whether it is in line with the Copyright Directive to calculate the private copying levy based on reproductions from both lawful as well as unlawful sources. According to Article 5(2) subsection (b) of the Copyright Directive, member states can exclude private copying for...

On 4 December 2013, the District Court in Amsterdam ruled that the broadcasting of a programme by Dutch television show ‘Undercover in Nederland’ (Undercover in the Netherlands), which detailed the dangers of finding sperm donors on the Internet, fell within the responsibility of the media to spread information and ideas of public interest and to execute its vital role of public watchdog. The Court further stated that there was no need to consider the question of whether women who use the Internet to find sperm donors could be seen as a vulnerable group of “victims” that need protection, since...

On 10 December 2013, the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam found that soccer players have no claim to image rights relating to the broadcast of their professional soccer matches. This confirms the judgment of the District Court of Amsterdam on 24 February 2004. Every player and club in the professional soccer business in the Netherlands, is a member of the Royal Dutch Soccer Union (KNVB). The clubs receive payment from the broadcasters and television stations for the right to broadcast match reports or parts of the match. The trade union for professional soccer players (VVCS), claimed that they had...

On 31 July 2013, the District Court of Amsterdam decided on the question of whether or not the format of a documentary series called “Hollandse Meesters in de 21e eeuw” ("Dutch Masters in the 21st century", hereafter: 'Dutch Masters') was protected by copyright law. The plaintiff collaborated with X on a series of filmed portraits, which consisted of 15-minute episodes displaying the methods used by an artist, the use of his materials and the artist's ideas on art. The artist was filmed in his workshop and each episode had a different director. The plaintiff had an agreement with Interakt, a series...

On 4 September 2013, the District Court of Amsterdam found that the collecting society VEVAM has no legal basis to claim compensation from cable companies for film directors concerning cable retransmission. VEVAM is a collecting society representing film directors. It acquires the director’s rights and collectively exploits them. VEVAM sued cable companies Ziggo and UPC for compensation for cable retransmissions. RODAP, the collecting society for film producers, public and commercial broadcasting organisations and distributors (e.g. cable companies), joined the proceedings in support of Ziggo and...