wipo escwa ec bey 03 doc4b

Liability for Linking on the InternetAnalysis of Case Law: 

Liability for Linking on the Internet Analysis of Case Law Alain Strowel Covington & Burling Brussels astrowel@cov.com

The Web and the Links: 

The Web and the Links No web, without hyperlinks between web pages: the links are the glue with which the web is woven What is a hyperlink? (pointer - HTML code) Which are the different linking techniques ? user activated links surface linking : to homepage deep linking : to subpage (or interior page) framing : no reference to linked page automatic links (also “embedded” or “dynamic” links, or “inlining”)

Overview of Cases: 

Overview of Cases First anglo-american cases (96-98): settlements Shetland Times, TotalNews, Ticketmaster (I) Second generation of cases (99-today):decisions US : DeCSS, Ticketmaster (II), Bernstein/Penney, eBay/BE, LA Times/Free Republic, Mormon Church, DVD/Mc Laughlin, Kelly/Arriba... FRG : Steinhöfel, Telco- and FTP-Explorer, Bau-markt, StepStone/OfiR... NL : XS4all, KPN/XSO, “Kranten.com” Fr : Sacem/Roche, Groupe Industrie/Ornis Sw : IFPI/Olsson B : IFPI/Skynet, IFPI/Beckers UK : Haymarket/Burmah Castrol (no decision)

Overview of Cases: 

Overview of Cases News sites: Shetland Times, TotalNews, LA Times/Free Republic, “Kranten.com”, Groupe Industrie/Ornis Databases online: Ticketmaster, KPN/XSO, Bau-markt, eBay/BE, StepStone/OfiR Music online (and contributory infringement): IFPI/Olsson, IFPI/Skynet, IFPI/Beckers Other contributory infringement cases in relation to IP rights: DeCSS-Reimerdes, Mormon Church, DVD/Mc Laughlin, Scientology/XS4all, Bernstein/Penney, etc.

I. Liability for the Provider of the Link: 

I. Liability for the Provider of the Link A. Infringement due to the pointer (for ex. titles as pointers) B. Infringement related to the linking technique (for ex. deep links, framing) C. Contributory infringement for further distribution of the illicit content linked-to (for ex. illicit MP3s, computer code, substantial part of databases)

Slide7: 

Shetland’s FIRST daily newspaper Read in 55 count worldw Main Headline Page Please check daily for new updates LATEST NEWS - Read about it Here !! Click on any headline below for the full story Cheaper job on school budget savings Bid to save centre after council funding ‘cock up’ Forum to monitor west oil effect on fishing

A. Pointers Shetland Times v. Shetland News(UK - Oct. 96, settlement Nov. 97): 

A. Pointers Shetland Times v. Shetland News (UK - Oct. 96, settlement Nov. 97) Facts : The Shetland News’ site used the titles of the Shetland Times’ articles, as pointers to deep-link to the corresponding articles on the Shetland Times’ site Legal basis : pointers infringe copyright on titles Preliminary injunction : granted Settlement : titles, plus “A Shetland Times story”, plus the Shetland Times’ logo, as pointers to the Shetland Times’ homepage

Advice: Agreement on a Link Icon: 

Advice: Agreement on a Link Icon

B. Linking TechniqueKranten.com (NL - Aug. 00): 

B. Linking Technique Kranten.com (NL - Aug. 00)

Deep Links and Pointers Kranten.com (NL - Aug. 00): 

Deep Links and Pointers Kranten.com (NL - Aug. 00) Deep links using headlines of articles as pointers: action for copyright and database right infringement + unfair competition Decision: no copyright infringement (no copy by creating a link or sending a list of links by e-mail; yes in case of copying the list of titles, but quotations allowed for a media company) no database right infringement: no substantial investment in the content and selection of the headlines (>< text of the articles)

Deep Links and Pointers Kranten.com (NL - Aug. 00): 

Deep Links and Pointers Kranten.com (NL - Aug. 00) Decision: even if the whole site must be considered as a database: no substantial taking (and no conflict with normal exploitation and no unreasonable prejudice for the legitimate interests of owners) no unfair competition (choice, but no necessity, to put ads on the homepage) Dismissed

Deep Links Ticketmaster v. Tickets.com (US - 03 + 08.00): 

Deep Links Ticketmaster v. Tickets.com (US - 03 + 08.00) Facts: deep links to interior pages (35.000 pages changed per day). Revenues: selling tickets and ads Decisions: No copyright infringement even for the temporary copies (10-15 s.) on defendant system in order to extract the information and reformat it Deep linking as such is not a form of unfair competition No breach of contract (online terms and conditions) because no “I agree” box (>< eBay)

Ticketmaster site:: 

Ticketmaster site: Notice: « By continuing past this page, you expressly agree to be bound by those terms and conditions which prohibit commercial use of this site. » Terms and conditions: « You must obtain our prior written consent to make commercial offers of any kind, whether by advertising, solicitations, links, or any other form of communication. (…) you may not resell or link to other sites for the purpose of selling tickets of any kind.  »

Framing Washington Post v. Total News (US - Settlement,97): 

Framing Washington Post v. Total News (US - Settlement,97) Facts : Total News’ site represents a collection of 1.200 links to news sites. Upon activation of the link, the content of the linked sites was presented within the frame of Total News’ site. Legal basis : copyright, trademark infringement, and misappropriation of content

Framing Washington Post v. Total News (US - Settlement,97): 

Framing Washington Post v. Total News (US - Settlement,97) Settlement : - no more framing - linking allowed, submitted to news sites’ right to revoke their permission upon 2 weeks notice - only use full names of linked web sites as pointers

FramingBau-markt.de v. baumarkt.de (FRG - June 99): 

Framing Bau-markt.de v. baumarkt.de (FRG - June 99)

FramingBau-markt.de v. baumarkt.de (FRG - June 99): 

Framing Bau-markt.de v. baumarkt.de (FRG - June 99)

FramingBau-markt.de v. baumarkt.de (FRG - June 99): 

Framing Bau-markt.de v. baumarkt.de (FRG - June 99) Facts: plaintiff offers a site with advertising “homepages” for various companies; defendant’s site provides a search function with links to the “homepages” of plaintiff’ site, but within its frame Legal basis: copyright, database protection and unfair competition (+ civil right to be named) Decision: no protection by copyright; no database right in favor of plaintiff (does not bear the risk; works under commission) dismissed

C. Contributory Infringement MP3 : Olsson case (SW- Sept. 99, Dec. 99 and 00): 

C. Contributory Infringement MP3 : Olsson case (SW- Sept. 99, Dec. 99 and 00) Procedure : criminal procedure against a student (complaint by IFPI) for providing links to illicit MP3 files Legal basis : copyright infringement and contributory infringement Decision : dismissed Conclusion: avoid Goliath v. David cases and criminal procedure

MP3 : Olsson case: 

MP3 : Olsson case Direct infringement : no distribution, because no physical copy no making available to the public Contributory infringement : no proof that the person who placed the copies online was guilty of an offence and that the action took place in Sweden no proof that the sound files were copied by visitors for purposes other than their private use

MP3 : IFPI v.Beckers (B - Dec. 99): 

MP3 : IFPI v.Beckers (B - Dec. 99) Facts : Student sued by IFPI for providing links to MP3-files (civil action) Legal basis ( “référé” or “preliminary injunction”) : no claim for copyright infringement tort liability (1382 Civil Code) for inducing copyright infringements Decision : granted

DeCSS case (US - Aug. 00): 

DeCSS case (US - Aug. 00) Facts : defendants sued for posting DeCSS (source code for descrambling the DVD protection system) + for linking to sites Legal basis : linking is a form of trafficking in technological measures covered by DMCA (if knowledge) Decision : prohibited by DMCA if linking to sites that automatically commence the process of downloading DeCSS sites that display nothing more than DeCSS

DeCSS case (US - Aug. 00): 

DeCSS case (US - Aug. 00) Decision : issue of first amendment compatibility (for ex. when linked-to sites contain other, non infringing materials) and “chilling effect” on linking No liability if offer of illicit technology but no evidence that the persons responsible for linking: know that the material is on the linked-to site know that it is unlawful circumvention technology create and maintain the link for the purpose of disseminating the technology

II. Liability of Intermediaries: 

II. Liability of Intermediaries A. Liability for hosting links to illicit content B. Liability for spidering licit information

A. Liability of Hosting Provider IFPI v. Skynet (B – Febr. 01): 

A. Liability of Hosting Provider IFPI v. Skynet (B – Febr. 01) Facts : No hosting of MP3’s but presence on client’ sites (3) hosted by Skynet (4), of links to 1/3 party sites (1) hosted by other ISPs (2) Skynet (4) other ISP (2) client-site (3) 1/3 site (1)

IFPI v. Skynet (B - Febr. 01): 

IFPI v. Skynet (B - Febr. 01) Decision : rules on participation to an infringement can apply to the hosting provider for its client’s hyperlinks to illicit material invitation to follow a notice and take down procedure with three days delay for taking down the material (procedure actually applied in Napster type file sharing as well)

B. Liability for Spidering eBay v. Bidder’s Edge (US -May 00): 

B. Liability for Spidering eBay v. Bidder’s Edge (US -May 00) Facts: defendant (BE) offers an auction aggregation site including information regarding eBay’s auctions. BE recursively crawls the eBay system to compile its database Legal Base: civil trespass (property right on the computer system) Outcome: injunction from accessing eBay’s computer systems by use of any automated querying program (robot, spider, etc.)

Spidering in Europe: Divergence with USKPN v. XSO (NL - Jan. 00): 

Spidering in Europe: Divergence with US KPN v. XSO (NL - Jan. 00) Legal context: database directive (1996) condition of the sui generis protection for non-copyrighted content: substantial investment made by the maker of the (auction, phone, etc.) listings effect: prohibition of extraction and reutilization Decision : no extraction but some form of prohibited reutilization of data on phone subscribers through framing (phone directory)

Conclusion: 

Conclusion Think before you link (content provider) Take down if you know (intermediary)

Slide34: 

Thank you for your attention Alain Strowel astrowel@cov.com