Search for: "State v. Constantine"
Results 41 - 60
of 135
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jul 2020, 1:23 am
The case of Constantin Film Verleih GmbH v YouTube LLC concerned the movies ‘Parker’ and ‘Scary Movie 5 over which Constantin had the exclusive rights to. [read post]
21 Jul 2020, 1:23 am
The case of Constantin Film Verleih GmbH v YouTube LLC concerned the movies ‘Parker’ and ‘Scary Movie 5 over which Constantin had the exclusive rights to. [read post]
21 Jul 2020, 1:23 am
The case of Constantin Film Verleih GmbH v YouTube LLC concerned the movies ‘Parker’ and ‘Scary Movie 5 over which Constantin had the exclusive rights to. [read post]
12 Jul 2020, 8:27 am
This, in a nutshell, is the question which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had been required to answer in Constantin Film v YouTube, C-264/19.The referral, which Germany’s Federal Court of Justice had made, focused on the interpretation of Article 8(2)(a) of the Enforcement Directive, a piece of EU legislation adopted in 2004.The background national proceedings had originated from the refusal, by YouTube and its parent company Google, to provide film… [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 8:41 am
Lacey v. [read post]
23 May 2020, 5:38 pm
Sterling v. [read post]
22 May 2020, 4:52 pm
IndiaAshutosh Dubey v. [read post]
15 Apr 2020, 1:25 am
This means that Member States might (though they are not obliged to) “address that dynamic concern by granting rightholders ‘rights to receive fuller information’. [read post]
19 Mar 2020, 4:03 pm
” (Constantin v. [read post]
15 Mar 2020, 9:15 am
These sorts of alterations have exploded in the USA, to the point that states like California and Virginia have introduced deep fake-specific legislation.The discussion was then followed by Kelsey Farish’s take on contractual issues arising between a talent and brand when negotiating the rights to use an image. [read post]
14 Mar 2020, 3:47 am
Readers might for instance recall the recent judgment in Sekmadienis Ltd v Lithuania [Katpost here], in which the ECtHR considered that a prohibition to use in advertising the image of Jesus and Mary on grounds of public morals should be regarded as an undue compression of the applicants' own freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 9:52 am
Schwartz, Partner, Constantine CannonDownload TestimonyRoad began in 1981 with 9th Circuit’s ruling against VCRs. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 3:44 pm
Hunt v. [read post]
1 Jan 2020, 4:24 pm
C-264/19 Constantin Film v YouTube asks questions about the permissible scope of court orders against intermediaries requiring provision of information about alleged infringers to rightholders under the IP Enforcement Directive. [read post]
15 Dec 2019, 2:15 pm
The YouTube and Uploaded cases (C-682/18 Petersongs v YouTube and C-683/18 Elsevier v Cyando) pending from the German Federal Supreme Court include questions around the communication to the public right, as do C-392/19 VG Bild-Kunst v Preussischer Kulturbesitz(Germany, BGH), C-442/19 Brein v News Service Europe (Netherlands, Supreme Court) and C-597/19 Mircom v Telenet (Belgium).Questions about injunctions against intermediaries are also raised in… [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 7:31 pm
The continuing high levels of tips may be attributed to continuing impact from the February 2018 Supreme Court decision in Digital Realty v. [read post]
6 Dec 2019, 12:03 pm
Author: Luke Hasskamp This article—the third in a series—focuses on the Supreme Court’s decision in Federal Baseball Club v. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 3:06 pm
The Directive is aimed at establishing a unified approach across Member States to reports of potential wrongdoing, because “insufficient protection in one Member State negatively impacts the functioning of Union policies not only in that Member State, but also in other Member States and in the Union as a whole. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 9:53 am
Now, a Second Circuit opinion in Kilgour v. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 10:10 am
Martino-Fleming v. [read post]
