11-Word Press Snippets Might Violate Copyright
Headline Legal News
According to Courthouse News, a Danish press-clipping company could be violating copyright by printing out 11-word snippets of news articles, the European Court of Justice ruled.
The Luxembourg-based court remanded the issue to Denmark for a determination on whether the snippets comprise intellectual property.
Media monitoring services company Infopaq International challenged the Danske Dagblades Forening, an association of Danish daily newspapers, over a requirement for permission to distribute 11-word extracts of news stories.
Legal framework for the permission requirement includes the 1979 Berne Convention, the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights as administered by the World Trade Organization, and European directives from 1996 and 2001 meant to govern electronic information and protect "European cultural creativity."
Infopaq argued that its process of scanning news articles, converting the data to text and emailing its customers summaries containing the five words before and after a keyword comprise fleeting use that's exempt from the permission requirements. Infopaq also prints out cover sheets with the text snippets.
The Court of Justice said it is up to the national court to determine whether the snippets comprise intellectual property.
Related listings
-
Sotomayor Running Out Of Potential GOP Support
Headline Legal News 07/28/2009According to The National Law Journal, the chances are dwindling that a substantial number of Republicans will vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, after a key GOP senator announced his opposition Monday morning. Sen. Jeff Sessions,...
-
Lawyer Says LexisNexis Charges Sneaky Fees
Headline Legal News 07/24/2009Courthouse News reports that Reed Elsevier, which owns and operates the LesixNexis legal research site, charges subscribers extra fees for searches without warning them, an attorney claims in a federal class action. Andrew Dieden claims subscribers a...
-
Student Athletes Sue NCAA For Profits From Their Images
Headline Legal News 07/23/2009Courthouse News is reporting that the National Collegiate Athletic Association forced thousands of student athletes to sign away rights to their own images and cheated them of a share in the profits from DVD and video game sales, according to an anti...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.