Press "Enter" to skip to content

Month: February 2018

Reasons for Vitorino’s recommendations on private copying and reprography levies: establishment of the level of tariffs

It can take several years to decide whether a given category of devices should be subject to a levy, and if so, what its level should be. Furthermore, the payment may reach rightholders only a long time after a given product is put on the market and the ‘harm’ has occurred.

Comments closed

Russian government is not going to provide ISP with authority to cut internet traffic to web-sites

Russian telecommunication companies proposed to cut internet traffic to certain web-sites. It seems they have proposed it on a case when network is overloaded. But which web-sites should receive priority for better bandwidth is not clear. Telecommunication companies have proposed to make “bandwidth priority” a law they develop.

Comments closed

RuTracker’s users can participate personally in its expansion

RuTracker has proposed its users to help web-resource to protect from Roskomnadzor and other Russian watchdogs and any restriction of access. Thanks to amendments to Russian law, it is possible to restrict access even to mirror of web-site, which was blocked in Russia, and sometimes even VPN is powerless to circumvent blocking. RuTracker’s idea is something similar to P2P principle – multiple domains would provide multiple accesses to main web-site.

Comments closed

Guidance on IPRED: ensuring a balanced regime for injunctions and intermediaries – filtering systems and dynamic injunctions

According to Article 15(1) of the e-Commerce Directive, Member States are prohibited from imposing a general monitoring obligation on online intermediaries within the meaning of Articles 12-14 of that Directive. Such an obligation would also be incompatible with the general requirements of fairness, proportionality and any measures not being excessively costly set out in Article 3 of IPRED.

Comments closed

SWD IA on EU copyright modernisation – impacts of second option for digital retransmission

Mandatory collective management of rights to retransmission of TV / radio broadcasts by means of any retransmission services, irrespective of the retransmission technology or network used, as long as they are provided to a defined number of users (subscribers, registered users)

Option 2 would enhance the level of legal certainty for the benefit of a wide range of retransmission services – IPTV, OTT, satellite, DTT, mobile – and can be expected to both (i) contribute to a greater variety of such services and (ii) provide an incentive to the retransmission service providers to expand the range of TV / radio channels offered to their subscribers.

Comments closed