Sedikit Info Seputar
Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order
Terbaru 2017
- Hay gaes kali ini team Android Media, kali ini akan membahas artikel dengan judul Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order, kami selaku Team Android Media telah mempersiapkan artikel ini untuk sobat sobat yang menyukai Android Media. semoga isi postingan tentang
Artikel copyright,
Artikel ISPs,
Artikel Italian copyright,
Artikel Italy,
Artikel RG No 31892/2016 - Mediaset Premium v Orlando and Others; blocking injunctions,
Artikel Tribunale di Milano, yang saya posting kali ini dapat dipahami dengan mudah serta memberi manfa'at bagi kalian semua, walaupun tidak sempurna setidaknya artikel kami memberi sedikit informasi kepada kalian semua. ok langsung simak aja sob
Judul:
Berbagi Info Seputar
Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order
Terbaru
link: Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order
Berbagi Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order Terbaru dan Terlengkap 2017
 |
| Every woman's dream: a decoder card to watch Champions League matches with her beau |
This is the question that the Tribunale di Milano (Milan Court of First Instance) addressed and answered in the NEGATIVE in an interesting interim decision (an ordinanza, RG No 31892/2016 - Mediaset Premium v Orlando and Others) on 27 July 2016, as reported by and commented on very useful online resource Marchi & Brevetti.
Background
In late May 2016 Mediaset Premium - which holds the exclusive broadcasting rights for the Italian territory of the football matches of some of the principal teams of the Serie A and UEFA Champions League - brought an action seeking an interim injunction against a number of major Italian internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to Calcion.
The latter (most recently operating as calcion.at) allowed users of its portal to watch in live streaming Mediaset Premium's broadcasts of relevant matches. Similarly to the Swedish ice hockey saga of C More as addressed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) [here], Calcion did so by circumventing Mediaset Premium's paywall.
Mediaset Premium's action had been preceded by several applications for blocking orders with Italian Communication Authority AGCOM. AGCOM had ordered major Italian ISPs to block access to a number of top-level domains of Calcion, including .be, .xyz, .co, .in, and .md.
Just to use the slightly abused reference to a whac-a-mole game, despite Mediaset Premium's enforcement efforts Calcion kept resurrecting under new top-level domains. Hence, Mediaset Premium's action before the Tribunale di Milano, seeking an order to block Calcion, independently from the top-level domain used, and any site associated with it.
The ISPs objected to Mediaset Premium's request, arguing - among other things - that:
- the remedy sought would impose on them a general monitoring obligation that would be contrary to the system envisage by the Ecommerce Directive (Article 15) as implemented into Italian law (Article 17 of D.Lgs. 70/2003); and
- the conditions for adopting an interim decision (in particular the urgency of it, ie the periculum in mora) were not present in the case at hand.
 |
| A Kat of the future |
The judge (Pierluigi Perrotti) noted how Mediaset Premium's request - if granted - would result in imposing on ISPs a general monitoring obligation and this would be contrary to the system envisaged by the Ecommerce Directive/D.Lgs. 70/2003.
According to the judge, not even Mediaset Premium's suggestion to indicate relevant sites to ISPs would help, because its request "appears in contrast with some fundamental principles in the procedural system":
- First, extending the order to any top-level domain and site that in the future would be associated with Calcion and whose content is still unknown would be tantamount to protecting from infringements that have yet to occur [this is true as far as interim proceedings are concerned, but for other types of proceedings the L'Oréal principles should apply].
- Secondly, the law does not allow a private party (Mediaset Premium) to exert the kind of control that only a judicial authority could exert as regards which sites ISPs should block.
- Thirdly, not all IP addresses indicated by Mediaset Premium would just concern Calcion. Currently some of those IP addresses host third-party sites that have nothing to do with Calcion. By referring to the CJEU decision in Telekabel [here], the judge recalled that IP protection must be balanced against other fundamental rights, including freedom to conduct a business and freedom of expression/information.
Overall, the judge acknowledged that "the illicit broadcasting of football matches in live streaming ... is a source of serious and irreparable harm for Mediaset Premium". Yet, this does not mean that Mediaset Premium can seek and obtain a blank blocking order whose content (ie the websites that ISPs should block) it is itself free to decide.
Finally
Small statistical tip for proceedings against ISPs in Italy: go to Rome if you are a rightholder [here, here, and here]; try to move all proceedings to Milan if you are an ISP!
Itulah sedikit Artikel Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order terbaru dari kami
Semoga artikel Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order yang saya posting kali ini, bisa memberi informasi untuk anda semua yang menyukai Android Media. jangan lupa baca juga artikel-artikel lain dari kami.
Terima kasih Anda baru saja membaca Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order
