Wright, Johnston & Mackenzie Solicitors

IP battle for Twilight town

2009 saw the continued success of the film adaptations of the popular Twilight series of teen vampire novels. Recently two movie studios have become involved in a dispute over intellectual property rights in relation to the stories.

Forks is the name of the non-fictional town that author Stephenie Meyer used as the setting for her Twilight novels. A film production company pitched to a number of movie studios the idea of making a documentary showing the impact the Twilight series had had on the town of Forks and its residents.

It is two of these studios who are involved in this latest dispute. Summit Entertainment have raised a trade mark infringement action against another company Topics Entertainment. Whilst both companies allegedly spoke with the film production company who pitched the original idea only one of these companies, Summit, ultimately worked with them.

Summit claim that Topics are now infringing their intellectual property rights. Both companies are planning to release documentaries regarding the town of Forks. Summit’s DVD is called “Twilight in Forks: The Saga of the Real Town”, and Topic’s is dubbed “Forks: Bitten by Twilight”.

Summit claim that the appearance of Topic’s DVD artwork and text is “confusingly similar” to its own and likely to cause confusion on the part of the public thus infringing its trade mark rights.

Summit own a portfolio of rights (including trade marks) in relation to the Twilight movies and accordingly are seeking damages in the US courts, together with an injunction to prevent Topics releasing their DVD.

UK trade mark law is similar to US law in its application of the test of likelihood of confusion to the buyer, when assessing claims of trade mark infringement. It also affords similar remedies of damages and interdict (akin to an injunction in the US or England).

For more information on protecting your intellectual property, contact a member of the iTech team.

« Back to top

Google bosses convicted for privacy breaches

In a landmark and highly controversial decision, an Italian court has convicted three Google executives for breaching Italy’s privacy laws.

The case concerned a video, posted on the YouTube website (which is owned by Google) showing an autistic teenager being bullied. The video was uploaded by an independent user of YouTube and was removed by Google within hours of being uploaded.

The Italian court found that the executives were guilty of breaching Italy’s privacy laws by allowing the video to be posted at all and the executives received 6 month suspended prison sentences.

The case is particularly controversial as EU law protects service providers from liability for material that they did not create or monitor, but simply pass on to the users of their service. The protection can be removed if the service providers do not remove the illegal content once they are made aware of it. 

This appears to provide absolute protection to Google – Google do not monitor the videos uploaded to YouTube, they simply allow YouTube users to watch the video.  Google also removed the video within hours of it being uploaded.

However, the Italian court ruled against Google and decided that the EU protection should not cover Google in this case. The court felt that Google could do more to monitor the uploads to the YouTube site.

The ruling highlights that it is crucial for website owners and service providers to as far as possible monitor the content being uploaded to their website. Simply turning a blind eye and claiming lack of knowledge is no longer acceptable. 

Whilst there are currently no similar cases arising in other EU countries, the Italian courts have indicated that they will pursue other internet giants, such as Facebook, eBay and Yahoo, on similar grounds.

Google has said that they will appeal the ruling and the iTech team will keep you updated with progress of the appeal and any further cases brought against the internet service giants.

If you have any queries in relation to privacy law or privacy obligations on websites and internet service providers, please contact a member of the iTech team.

« Back to top

Online retailers: beware of printed brochures

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has ruled that online retailers whose prices are subject to change should not use printed brochures for advertising their goods.

The statement follows the ASA’s reprimand of online electronics retailer Dabs.com, for providing an incorrect price in their printed brochures. Dabs advertised prices for a laptop computer in their brochure but did not offer this price on their website.

Dabs told the ASA that the difference in price was due to the ever-changing nature of the online electronic retail market. Whilst Dabs admitted that the price in the printed brochure had changed since the brochure had been printed, they felt that they should be protected because the brochure expressly stated to “check www.dabs.com for latest prices”.

However, the ASA felt that this statement was not enough – it did not make it sufficiently clear that the prices in the brochure were subject to change. They found that the advert was misleading as customers have a right to expect that the advertised price will remain in force whilst the advert was in circulation.

The ASA stated that as a general rule for certain online retailers “a brochure was an unsuitable medium for advertising their products because it was likely to remain in circulation after prices had changed”.

If you wish any further advice on the requirements and regulations regarding advertising online, please contact a member of the iTech team.

« Back to top

Patent battle between technology giants heats up

Relations between technology giants Nokia and Apple have reached a new low after Nokia reported Apple to the US International Trade Commission (ITC), claiming that “virtually all” of Apple’s products violate Nokia patents.

The patents involve hard-ware related products for antennas, user interface, cameras and power management.

Nokia claims that Apple is using this patented Nokia technology to power its iPhones, iPods and Macintosh computers.

It is expected that the ITC will rule on whether to pursue Nokia’s complaint by the end of March.

The claim to the ITC is the latest in a battle of claim and counter-claim between Apple and Nokia after licensing negotiations broke down between the parties in 2009.

In October 2009, Nokia filed a lawsuit in the US claiming that Apple’s iPhone was infringing a number of its wireless technology patents and demanded payment for every handset sold.

Apple responded by launching its own countersuit, claiming that Nokia had unlawfully copied the iPhone and infringed a number of its own patents in the process. Apple also claimed that Nokia had refused to license other technologies on fair terms.

The cases are not expected to be heard until 2011 at the earliest and the iTech team will keep you updated with progress.

If you wish any advice in relation to patents or intellectual property rights in general, please contact a member of the iTech team.

« Back to top

Court of Appeal rules that location of the host server is irrelevant

The Court of Appeal in England has ruled that the laws of England and Wales apply to material published online, even if the material is hosted by a server in a different country.

The case concerned the online publication of controversial articles which were derogatory to Jewish and black people. The articles were written by Stephen Whittle and edited and published by Simon Guy Sheppard in the UK. The articles were then hosted on a server in the US.

The English court at first instance convicted Mr Whittle and Mr Sheppard for publishing the racially inflammatory material.

Mr Whittle and Mr Sheppard then appealed to the Court of Appeal on the basis that the laws of England and Wales should not apply because the articles were hosted by a US server.

The Court of Appeal rejected the appeal on the basis that much of the activity - the writing, editing and publishing – took place in the UK and therefore the laws of England and Wales did apply.

The ruling means that it is irrelevant where the host server is based – the English courts will have jurisdiction if the majority of the activity takes place in the UK.

The Scottish courts have yet to consider such a case, but it is expected that they will follow the English lead.

« Back to top

£50,000 prize up for grabs for Scottish Innovators

The Gannochy Trust and The Royal Society of Edinburgh have declared the 2010 Innovation Award open for applications.

Innovators working in Scotland, or whom have a significant connection to Scotland (and are aged 45 or below at 31st January 2010) can enter the competition. Entrants must be able to show that they have an innovation which has achieved the ‘Proof of Concept’ stage, and that the innovation is capable of improving the well-being of Scotland.

The award offers a £50,000 cash prize to the successful entrant, together with a gold medal. The aim of the prize is to enable the innovators to take their innovation to the next stage, in the hope that it will provide a social or economic benefit to Scotland.

Past successful entrants have been drawn from a wide variety of innovators, highlighting that the Gannochy Trust and The Royal Society of Edinburgh are looking to a range of different industries for new ideas. For example, 2006’s winning entrant was Dr Colin Urquhart of Dimensional Imaging Limited, for his innovation in developing DI3DTM, a 3-D image capturing system which is used in a variety of sectors such as facial surgery. The 2006 winner was Dr Marie Claire Parker, whom developed a process known as ‘Protein-coated Microcrystal (PCMC) Technology’, with a view to changing how injected medicines are taken, by allowing such medicines to be inhaled as an alternative.

The award seeks to encourage Scottish innovators to develop their ideas, and to reward those whom have created innovations which have a genuine prospect of improving the wellbeing of Scotland, a country well renowned throughout the world for its innovation.

In order to enter the competition, the entrant must fill in a nomination form. The entrant must attach 2 A4 single-sided pages together with a one-page CV, and the details of two referees. Applications can be obtained from The Royal Society of Edinburgh website www.rse.org.uk (also by email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) or tel: 0131 240 5013) Entries must be submitted by no later than 14th May 2010.

« Back to top