Search results : 978

Ofcom’s decision of 23 October 2013, considered that material broadcast on ITV’s daytime programme ‘This Morning’ constituted unjust and unfair treatment by revealing a person’s identity, and not giving the person a right of reply. One of Ofcom’s duties under section 3(2)(e) of the Communications Act 2003 (The Act) is to ensure that programmes broadcast on television adequately protect the public from the inclusion of offensive and harmful material. Also, under section 3(2)(f) of the Act there is a duty to protect persons from (i) unfair treatment in programmes included in a TV broadcast; and (ii)...

The Honourable Mr Justice Birss of the High Court, London gave judgment on 31 July 2013 in a court action between the pop star Rihanna and the United Kingdom clothing store Topshop which confirmed in English law that there is no legal concept of image rights, which is found in certain legal jurisdictions such as the USA. Image (or Personality) Rights is the right of an individual (or a legal entity) to have control over the commercial exploitation of their name, likeness, or other unequivocal facet of their identity; for example if a photographic image of a well-known performer appeared on a T-shirt...

On 8 November 2013 the judge at the regional court in Nantes delivered a decision under the urgent procedure in a rather unusual case. A well-known criminal who had escaped from prison on 13 April 2013 using explosives, after having taken four prison warders hostage (he was recaptured the following month) had discovered that the television channel M6 was preparing for broadcast a number of images filmed by prison video surveillance cameras when he escaped, as part of a news report on prisons and the violence that is omnipresent in them. He therefore had the television channel summoned to appear...

According to media reports, in a decision taken in a file-sharing case on 7 October 2013, the Oberlandesgericht Köln (Cologne Appeal Court - OLG) granted a rightsholder’s right to information held by an Internet access provider (case no. 6 W 84/13). In the case concerned, the rightsholder had asserted a claim to information under the terms of Article 101(9) of the Urheberrechtsgesetz (Copyright Act - UrhG) in order to issue a warning to a file-sharer whose IP address it had previously tried to trace. According to the court, a right to information arose if there was a sufficient degree of certainty...

In a judgment of 16 October 2013, the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Düsseldorf Court of Appeal - OLG) decided that the so-called “Stolpe ruling” does not apply to hidden allegations. The dispute in the case at hand concerned what the plaintiff claimed was a negative impression created by reading “between the lines” of a report on an insolvency procedure. As far as these “hidden statements” were concerned, an injunction could only be granted against allegations under Articles 823(1) and 1004(1)(2) of the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (Civil Code) in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Grundgesetz...