Show Less
You do not have access to this content

Cross-Border Copyright Licensing

Law and Practice

Edited by Carlo S. Lavizzari and René Viljoen

Copyright Licensing can no longer be considered purely from the perspective of the licensor’s home territory. This practical and wide-ranging reference work provides comprehensive coverage of the law and practice of cross-border licensing in a number of major territories, including China, the EU, India, Mexico, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, and the USA. The book, written by expert authors with insight from practice and from their home jurisdictions, focuses on both copyright licensing and competition law and, specifically, the inter-relation between these legal fields. The book is uniquely structured to provide both thematic coverage and detailed analysis of each territory’s applicable laws and regulations, highlighting and addressing the legal issues that are most critical in and relevant to licensing practice. Cross-Border Copyright Licensing is an essential starting point for anyone considering or advising on the implementation or enforcement of a copyright licensing program, in either developed and emerging markets.
Show Summary Details
This content is available to you

TABLE OF CASES

 

AUSTRALIA

 

Dixon Projects Pty Ltd v Masterton Homes Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 889, (1996) 36 IPR 136 6.20

Talbot v General Television Corp Pty Ltd [1981] RPC 1 6.11

Telstra Corp Ltd v Phone Directories Co Pty Ltd [2010] FCAFC 149, (2010) 90 IPR 1 6.17

Trumpet Software Pty Ltd v Ozmail Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 560, (1996) 34 IPR 481 6.46

CHINA

 

Guangdong Higher People’s Court Yue Gao Fa Min San Zhong Zi (2013) No. 305 and 306 1.145

Huawei against InterDigital 1.145

Supreme People’s Court Civil Judgment Min San Zhong Zi (2013) No. 4 (Qihoo v Tencent) 1.153

Supreme People’s Court Min San Zhong Zi (2009) No. 4 1.15

EUROPEAN UNION

Copyright licensing section

Case C-301/15, Soulier Doke v Ministre de la Culture, Judgment of 16 November 2016, ECLI:EU:C:2016:878 2.70

Case C-572/13, Hewlett-Packard Belgium SPRL v Reprobel SCRL, Judgment of 12 November 2015, ECLI:EU:C:2015:750 2.62, 2.63

Case C-30/14, Ryanair Ltd. v PR Aviation BV, Judgment of 15 January 2015, ECLI:EU:C:2015:10 2.46

Case C-128/11, UsedSoft GmbH v Oracle International Corp., Judgment of 3 July 2012, ECLI:EU:C:2012:407 2.85, 2.125, 2.144, 2.145, 2.158

Case C-135/10, Società Consortile Fonografici (SCF) v Marco del Corso, Judgment of 15 March 2012, ECLI:EU:C:2012:140 2.12

Case C-277/10, Martin Luksan v Petrus van der Let, Judgment of 9 February 2012, ECLI:EU:C:2012:65 2.61, 2.62, 2.63, 2.66

Case C-533/07, Falco Privatstiftung and Thomas Rabitsch v Gisela Weller Lindhorst, Opinion of AG Trstenjak of 27 January 2009, ECLI:EU:C:2009:257 2.73, 2.111

Case C-360/00, Land Hessen v G. Ricordi & Co. Bühnen- und Musikverlag GmbH, Judgment of 6 June 2002, ECLI:EU:C:2000:346 2.67

Joined cases C-92/92 and C-326/92, Phil Collins v Imtrat Handelsgesellschaft mbH and Patricia Im- und Export Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbh and Leif Emanuel Kraul v EMI Electrola GmbH, Judgment of 20 October 1993, ECLI:EU:C:1993:847 2.67, 2.158, 2.181

Case C-106/89, Marleasing v Comercial Internacional de Alimentación, Judgment of 13 November 1990, ECLI:EU:C:1990:395 2.29

Case 14/83, Von Colson and Kamann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Judgment of 10 April 1984, ECLI:EU:C:1984:153 2.29

France
Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation)

Cass. soc., Judgment of 11 May 2016, No. 14–26507; ECLI:FR:CCASS:2016:SO00887 – unpublished 2.65

Cass. civ. I, Judgment of 10 April 2013, Case 11–12.508, Bull. 2013, I, No. 68; Cases 11–12.509 and 11–12.510 – unpublished 2.109

Cass. civ. I, Judgment of 28 May 1991, [1992] 23 IIC 702 – Affaire Huston 2.110

Germany
Federal Supreme Court (BGH)

BGH, I ZR 198/13, Judgment of 21 April 2016, I ZR 198/13, [2016] GRUR 596, – Verlegeranteil 2.62

BGH, I ZR 43/14, Judgment of 21 April 2016, [2016] GRUR 1048 – An Evening with Marlene Dietrich 2.67

BGH, I ZR 129/08, Judgment of 3 February 2011, [2011] GRUR 418 – Usedsoft II 2.85

BGH, I ZR 88/95, Judgment of 2 October 1997, [1999] GRUR 152 or in English translation [1999] 30 IIC 227–233 – Spielbankaffaire 2.109

BGH, X ZR 56/93, Judgment of 20 December 1994, [1995] GRUR 338/341 – Kleiderbügel 2.81

Upper Regional Courts (OLG)

OLG Köln, Order of 17 April 2015, Case 6 W 14/15, openJur 2015, 16635 – Reasonable Doubt 2.78

OLG München, Judgment of 1 August 1985, Case 29 U 2114/85, [1986] GRUR 460 – Die unendliche Geschichte 2.94

Italy

Tribunale di Milano, 4 February 1997, [1998] GRUR Int. 503 2.109

Competition Section

CFI (T-167/08), 27 June 2012 – Microsoft Corp v European Commission 2.178, 2.186

CJEU (C-54, 58/64), 13 July 1966 – Grundig/Consten 2.124

CJEU (C-40/70), 18 February 1971 – Sirena/Novimpex 2.124

CJEU (C-78/70), 8 June 1971 – Deutsche Grammophon/Metro 2.124, 2.144

CJEU (C-62/79), 18 March 1980 – Coditel/Ciné Vog I 2.145, 2.148

CJEU (C-270/80), 9 February 1982 – Polydor/Harlequin 2.144

CJEU (C-258/78), 8 June 1982 – Nungesser/Commission 2.124, 2.142

(C-262/81), 6 October 1982 – Coditel/Ciné-Vog Films II 2.124, 2.125, 2.128, 2.142, 2.145, 2.148, 3.91

CJEU (C-193/83), 25 February 1986 – Windsurfing International 2.159

CJEU (C-158/86), 17 May 1988 – Warner Bros/Christiansen 2.147

CJEU (C-53/87), 5 October 1988 – CICRA u. a./Renault 2.180

CJEU (C-238/87), 5 October 1988 – Volvo/Veng 2.180, 2.184

CJEU (C-341/87), 24 January 1989 – EMI/Patricia 2.144

CJEU (C-320/87), 12 May 1989 – Ottung 2.159

CJEU (C-395/87), 13 July 1989 – Tournier 2.182

CJEU (C-110/88, 241/88 and 242/88), 13 July 1989 – Lucazeau and others 2.182

CJEU (C-92, 326/92), 20 October 1993 – Phil Collins 2.125

CJEU (C-241/91 P and C-242/91 P), 6 April 1995 – Magill 2.178, 2.180, 2.184, 2.185

CJEU (C-418/01), 29 April 2004– IMS/Health 2.178, 2.180, 2.184, 2.186

CJEU (C-52/07), 11 December 2008 – Kanal 5/STIM 2.179, 2.187, 2.188

CJEU (C-125/07), 24 September 2009 – Erste Group Bank 2.166

CJEU (C-403, 429/08), 4 October 2011 – Premier League/Murphy 2.124, 2.125, 2.128, 2.144, 2.158, 2.181

CJEU (C-5/11), 21 June 2012 – Donner    2.125

CJEU (C-128/11), 3 July 2012 – UsedSoft/Oracle    2.144, 2.145, 2.181

CJEU (C-439/11), 11 July 2013 – P Ziegler 2.166

CJEU (C-351/12), 27 February 2014 – OSA 2.179, 2.182

CJEU (C-67/13), 11 September 2014 – Cartes Bancaires 2.170

CJEU (C-419/13), 22 January 2015 – Art & Allposters 2.145

CJEU (C-170/13), 16 July 2015 – Huawei/ZTE 2.190

CJEU (C-567/14), 7 July 2016 – Genentech/ Sanofi-Aventis 2.159

CJEU (C-174/15), 10 November 2016 – Vereniging Openbare Bibliotheken 2.145

Commission decision of 2 December 1975, IV/26.949, OJ L 6 – AOIP/Beyard 2.141

Commission decision of 23 December 1977, OJ 1978, No L 70/69 – Campari 2.140, 2.171

Commission decision of 15 September 1989, Case IV/31.734, OJ L 284, 3.10.1989, p. 36–44 – Film purchases    2.145, 2.151

Commission decision of 6 October 1994, OJ L 309, 2.12.1994, p. 1–23, para. 89 – Pasteur Mérieux-Merck    2.171

Commission decision of 10 May 2000, Case IV/32.150, OJ 2000 L 151/18, para. 102 et seq. – Eurovision; EGC (T-185/00, T-216/00, T-299/00, T-300/00), 8 October 2002, ECR 2002 II-3805, para. 71 et seq 2.164

Commission decision of 23 July 2003, COMP/C.2–37.398 – UEFA Champions League 2.164

Commission decision of 19 January 2005, COMP/C.2–37.214, para. 22 et seq. – Bundesliga 2.164

Commission Case AT.40023 – Cross border access to pay-TV 2.145

German Higher Regional Court Frankfurt (11 U 115/13) 15 July 2014, WuW/E DE-R 2018, 2022 – Harry Potter 2.125, 2.140, 2.152

German Federal Court of Justice (I ZR 165/89), 12 December 1991, GRUR 1992, 310, 311 – Taschenbuch-Lizenz 2.149

German Federal Court of Justice (I ZR 244/97), 6 July 2000, GRUR 2001, 153, 155 – OEM-Version 2.149, 2.157

German Higher Regional Court Berlin Kammergericht (5 U 4102/99), 26 January 2001, ZUM 2001, 592, 594 – Postkarten in Pralinenschachteln 2.149

German Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf (U 24/88), 13 December 1988, GRUR 1990, 188, 189 – Vermietungsverbot 2.157

German Higher Regional Court Hamburg (3 U 38/11), 12 December 2013, WuW/E DE-R 4443 para. 405 (juris) – FC St. Pauli II 2.158

German Federal Court of Justice (KZR 40/02), 13 July 2004, GRUR 2004, 966, 967 – Standard-Spundfass for patent law 2.176, 2.184

German Federal Court of Justice (KZR 108/10), 27 March 2012, GRUR 2012, 1062– Elektronischer Programmführer 2.176

German Higher Regional Court Munich (U (K) 4464/02), 30 January 2003, GRUR-RR 2003, 225, 225 – Filmverleiher 2.177

German Federal Court of Justice (KZR 40/02), 13 July 2004, GRUR 2004, 966, 970 – Standard-Spundfass 2.176

INDIA

 

ABC Laminart Pvt Ltd & Anr. v AP Agencies, Salem [AIR [1989] SC [1239] (Supreme Court of India) 3.181, 3.183

AGS Entertainment Pvt Ltd v UOI (order dated June 26, 2013) (Madras High Court) 3.191

Amar Nath Sehgal v Union of India [2002] 25 PTC [56] Del (Delhi High Court) 3.55

Arun Chadha v Oca Productions Pvt Ltd [Order dated 5th July 2012 in CS (OS) No. 1096 of 2009] 3.56

Autodesk Inc v AVT Shankardass, [FAO (OS) 116 of 2008, order dated 4 July 2008; Delhi High Court] 3.152

Badri Prasad v State of Madhya Pradesh [1970] AIR 706 (Supreme Court of India) 3.01

British India Steam Navigation Co Ltd v Shanmughavilas Cashew Industries [1990] SCC 3 [481] (Supreme Court of India) 3.179

Case 36/2010 Singhania & Partners LLP v Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt Ltd and Others, CCI decision of 22 June 2011 3.119

Case 24/2011 Shri Sonam Sharma vs Apple Inc. USA & Ors, CCI decision of 19 March 2013 3.124

Case 36/211 M/s Kansan News Pvt Ltd vs M/s Fastway Transmission Pvt Ltd and Ors, CCI decision 3 July 2012 3.126

Case 40/2011 In Re: M/s HT Media Ltd v Super Cassettes Industries Ltd, CCI decision of 1 October 2014 3.120

Case 56/2011 M/s Cinergy Independent Film Services Pvt Ltd v Telangana Telugu Film Distribution Association and Ors, CCI decision of 1 January 2013 3.101

Case 48/2011 In Re:M/s ESYS Information Technologies Pvt Ltd v Intel Corporation and Ors, CCI decision of 16 January 2011 3.110

Case Nos. 07 and 30 of 2012 (Google), Order of 8 February 2018, CCI 3.127

CIT v Sun TV Ltd (2001) 4 SCC 593 3.190

Dart Industries Inc & Anr. v Techno Plast & Ors [2016 (67) PTC 457 (Delhi High Court)] 3.36

Diljeet Titus, Advocate v Alfred A. Adebare [2006] 32 PTC 609] (Delhi High Court) 3.15

Director of Income Tax v Infrasoft Ltd [2014] 220 TAXMAN 273] (Delhi High Court) 3.188

Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt Ltd v Sanguine Technical Publishers (Delhi High Court, 1 July 2013 in OMP 856/2012) 3.06

Entertainment Network (India) Ltd v M/s Super Cassette Industries Ltd AIR 2009 SC (Supp) 1150 (Supreme Court of India) 3.50

Entertainment Network (India) Ltd v Super Cassettes Ltd [2008] 37 PTC [353][SC] (Supreme Court of India) 3.14

Entertainment Network (India) Ltd v Super Cassettes Industries [2008] 9 SCALE [69] (Supreme Court of India) 3.162

Gee Pee Films Private Ltd v Pratik Chowdhury & Ors [2002] 24 PTC 392] (Calcutta High Court) 3.42

Globe Transport Corporation v Triveni Engineering Works [1983] 4 SCC 707] (Supreme Court of India) 3.181

Gramophone Company of India Ltd v Birendra Bahadur Pandey & Ors [1984] 2 SCC 534] (Supreme Court of India) 3.50

Gramophone Company of India Ltd v Birendra Bahadur Pandey and Ors [AIR [1984] Cal [69] (Calcutta High Court) 3.49

Harishankar Jain v Sonia Gandhi [AIR [2001] SC 3689](Supreme Court of India) 3.184

Ilayaraja v B. Narsimhan & Ors [2015 (63) PTC 358] (Madras High Court) 3.06

Indian Heritage Society & Anr v Meher Malhotra & Anr [CS(OS)No. 2717 of 2011] (Delhi High Court) 3.30

Indian Performing Right Society v Eastern India Motion Picture [AIR [1977] SC [1443](Supreme Court of India) 3.41

International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) v Aditya Pandey and Ors (2016 (9) SCALE 89) 3.29, 3.63

Jagdish Saran and Ors. v Union of India [(1980) 2 SCC 768] (Supreme Court of India) 3.50

John Richard Brady v Chemical Process Equipment Pvt Ltd [AIR 1987372] (Delhi High Court) 3.16

Konrad Wiedemann GmbH v Standard Castings Pvt Lt. [1985] 10 IPLR 243] (Delhi High Court) 3.15

Krishika Lulla & Ors v Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta & Anr [2016] (2) SCC 521 (Supreme Court of India) 3.25

Leopold Café & Stores and Anr. v Novex Communications Pvt Ltd [2014 (59) PTC 505] (Bombay High Court) 3.08

Mac Charles v Indian Performing Rights Society [Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 3019 of 2013] (order dated 30th September 2013) (Supreme Court of India) 3.154

Madhya Pradesh Housing Board v Progressive Writers and Publishers (2009) 5 SCC 678 (Supreme Court of India) 3.01

Manu Bhandari v Kala Vikas Pictures Pvt Ltd [AIR [1987] Delhi 13 (Delhi High Court)] 3.55

Midas Hygiene v Sudhir Bhatia [2015 (64) PTC 366 (DEL)] 3.36

Mishra Bandhu Karyalaya v Shivratanlal Koshal [1970) AIR 261 Madhya Pradesh High Court] (based on the primary and un-amended Copyright Act, 1957) 3.01

Mr. Anil Gupta & Anr v Mr. Kunal Dasgupta & Ors [2002] 97 DLT 257] (Delhi High Court) 3.15

M/s Phonographic Performance Ltd v M/s Lizard Lounge (Delhi High Court, in RFA (OS) No. 57 of 2008 on 3 November 2008) 3.162

Najma Heptulla v Orient Longman Ltd [AIR (1989) Delhi 63 (Delhi High Court)] 3.27

New Horizons Ltd v Union of India, [AIR 2007 Delhi 145] 3.152

N.T. Raghunathan v All India Reporter [AIR 1971 Bombay 48] (Bombay High Court) 3.43

Patel Roadways Ltd, Bombay v Prasad Trading Company [AIR [1992] SC [1514] (Supreme Court of India 3.180

Performing Rights Society Ltd v B4U Network (Europe) Ltd [2014 F.S.R. 17] 3.62

Pine Labs Pvt. Ltd v Gemalto Terminals India Pvt Ltd [2011 (48) PTC 248 (Delhi High Court)] 3.07

R.G. Anand v Delux Films & Ors [AIR [1978] SC 1613] (Supreme Court of India) 3.12

Rhodia Ltd v Neon Laboratories Ltd [AIR [2002] Bom 502](Bombay High Court) 3.182, 3.183

Souza Cruz v N.K. Jain [PTC (Suppl.) 2892 (Del.)] 3.152

Super Cassettes v Malayalam Communications Ltd (Delhi High Court, 24 October, 2013) 3.11

Super Cassettes v Music Broadcast Pvt Ltd [(2012) 5 SCC 488] (Supreme Court) 3.59

Super Cassettes Industries Ltd v Music Broadcast Pvt Ltd [2012] (50) PTC 225 (SC) (Supreme Court of India) 3.156

Super Cassettes v Nirulas Corner House (P) Ltd [148 (2008) Delhi Law Times 487] 3.61

Super Cassette Industries Ltd v Bathla Cassettes India (P) Ltd [AIR 1994 Delhi 237] 3.154

Tata Consultancy Services v State of Andhra Pradesh [(2005) 1 SCC 308] 3.190

The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford and Ors v Rameshwari Photocopy Services [2016] SCC OnlineDel 5128 3.25

Trimex International FZE Ltd, Dubai v Vedanta Aluminium Ltd [2010] 3 SCC [1] (Supreme Court of India) 3.03

Union of India and Anr v Azadi Bachao Andolan and Anr [(2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) 3.187

Vicco Laboratories & Anr v Art Commercia Advertising Pvt Ltd and Ors [AIR 2001 SC 2753] 3.41

V.T. Thomas & Ors v Malayala Manorama Co Ltd [AIR [1989] KER 49] (Kerala High Court) 3.41

Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd v Gajendra Singh & Ors [2008] 36 PTC [53] (Bombay High Court) 3.41

Competition Law Section

European Union
Court of Justice

Case 27/76 United Brands v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:1978:22 3.104, 3.112

Case 262/81 Coditel II, ECLI:EU:C:1982:334 2.124, 2.125, 2.128, 2.142, 2.145, 2.148, 3.91

Case C-457/10 P AstraZeneca v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2012:770 3.114

General Court

Case T-111/96 ITT Promedia v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:1998:183 3.114

Case T-201/04 Microsoft Corporation v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2007:289 3.115

Case C-202/07 France Télécom SA v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2009:214 3.116

CISAC (judgments in Case T-392/08, AEPI v Commission; Case T-398/08, Stowarzyszenie Autorów ‘ZAiKS‘ v Commission; Case T-401/08, Säveltäjäin Tekijänoikeustoimisto Teosto v Commission; Case T-410/08, GEMA v Commission; Case T-411/08, Artisjus Magyar Szerzõi Jogvédõ Iroda Egyesület v Commission; Case T-413/08, SOZA v Commission; Case T-414/08, AKKA/LAA v Commission; Case T-415/08, IMRO v Commission; Case T-416/08, EAU v Commission; Case T-417/08, SPA v Commission; Case T-418/08, OSA v Commission; Case T-419/08, LATGA-A v Commission; Case T-420/08, SAZAS v Commission; Case T-421/08, Performing Right Society v Commission; Case T-422/08, Sacem v Commission; Case T-425/08, KODA v Commission; Case T-428/08, STEF v Commission; Case T-432, AKM v Commission; Case T-433/08, SIAE v Commission; Case T-434/08, TONO v Commission; Case T-442/08, CISAC v Commission; Case T-451/08, Stim v Commission, judgments of 12 April 2013 finding anti-competitive conduct on the part of collecting societies) 3.92

European Commission decisions

Google Search (Shopping) (Case AT.39740) Commission press release IP/17/1784, MEMO/17/1785 and STATEMENT/17/1806 3.127

Rambus (Case COMP/38.636), Commission decision of 9 December 2009 3.115

Samsung (Case COMP/C-3/39.939), Commission decision of 29 April 2014 3.129

Motorola (Case COMP/C-3/39.985), Commission decision of 29 April 2014 3.129

MEXICO

 

A.D.124/2013 Tiendas Tres B, S.A. de C.V. First Tribunal for Administrative Matters of the First Circuit book 1 vol II p 1205 (MX 2013) 4.24

A.D. 643/2012. Víctor Vasarhelyl & others Third Tribunal for Civil Matters of the First Circuit vol XVI p 1389 (MX 2012) 4.19

Civil Matters 192/87, 193/87, 194/87, 195/87 and 196/87 Third Chamber of the Supreme Court vol 217–228 pt 4 p 371 (MX 1987) 4.82

Varios 912/2010 Supreme Court Plenary Resolution book III vol I p 535 (MX 2011) 4.21, 4.23

RUSSIA

 

(FAS vs. the company VOLMA/ illegal use in advertising of the symbolic of the FIFA Football World Cup 2018 in Russia) 5.155

(a citizen of the Russian Federation vs. the company Bayer and the Russian TV-channel TNT/ violation of the legislation on advertising in the video reel about medication) 5.155

Decision of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated August 17, 2016 (Google vs. FAS) (judicial) and Decision of FAS of Russia dated September 18, 2015 (Yandex vs. Google) (non-judicial) 5.155

Explanation No. 6 by the FAS dated May 25, 2016 ‘Proof and calculation of damages caused by violation of antimonopoly legislation’ 5.144

(Kaspersky Lab vs. Microsoft/ prohibition of actions of dominating subject which can limit competition or harm interest of third parties or of consumers) 5.155

Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 13 December, 2016 (review of the constitutionality of the provisions of the Civil Code regarding the compensation amounts for the violation of exclusive rights to IP objects) 5.186, 5.187, 5.188

Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court and the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of 26 March 2009 ‘On some issues arising in connection with implementation of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation’ 5.98

SINGAPORE

 

Alliance Entertainment Singapore Pte Ltd v Sim Kay Teck [2007] 2 SLR(R) 869, [2007] SGHC 43 6.08, 6.47, 6.49, 6.50, 6.51

Asia Pacific Publishing Pte Ltd v Pioneers & Leaders (Publishers) Pte Ltd [2011] 4 SLR 381, [2011] SGCA 37 6.11, 6.17

Asian Corporate Services (SEA) Pte Ltd v Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch) [2006] 1 SLR 901, [2006] SGCA 1 6.119

AUVI Trademark, Re [1991] 2 SLR(R) 786, [1991] SGHC 165 6.49

Brader Daniel John and ors v Commerzbank AG [2014] 2 SLR 81, [2013] SGHC 284 6.03

Chua Chian Ya v Music & Movement (S) Pte Ltd [2010] 1 SLR 607, [2009] SGCA 54 6.49, 6.52

Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR(R) 594, [2004] SGHC 71 6.03, 6.13

Clearlab SG Pte Ltd v Ting Chong Chai and others [2015] 1 SLR 163, [2014] SGHC 221 6.11

Creative Technology Ltd v Aztech Systems Pte Ltd [1997] 1 SLR 621, [1996] SGCA 71 6.42, 6.43

Da Vinci Collection Pte Ltd v Richemont International SA [2006] 3 SLR 560, [2006] SGCA 19 6.119

Fairview Developments Pte Ltd v Ong & Ong Pte Ltd and another appeal [2014] 2 SLR 318, [2014] SGCA 5 6.04

Gay Choon Ing v Loh Sze Ti Terence Peter [2009] 2 SLR(R) 332, [2009] SGCA 3 6.02, 6.03

Global Yellow Pages Ltd v Promedia Directories Pte Ltd [2010] SGHC 97 6.64, 6.77

Konsortium Tours and Express Pte Ltd v CCS [2011] SGCAB 1 6.81

Muthusamy v Subramaniam [1965–1967] SLR(R) 71, [1965] SGHC 16 6.05

New Line Productions, Inc and another v Aglow Video Pte Ltd and others and other suits [2005] 3 SLR(R) 660, [2005] SGHC 118 6.119

Odex Pte Ltd v Pacific Internet Ltd [2007] SGDC 248 6.08, 6.50

Odex Pte Ltd v Pacific Internet Ltd [2008] 3 SLR 18, [2008] SGHC 35 6.08, 6.50, 6.119

QB Net Co Ltd v Earnson Management (S) Pte Ltd and others [2007] 1 SLR(R) 1, [2006] SGHC 183 6.11

Real Electronics Industries Singapore (Pte) Ltd v Nimrod Engineering Pte Ltd [1995] SLR(R) 909, [1995] SGHC 209 6.28, 6.49

SM Summit Holdings Ltd and anor v Public Prosecutor and another action [1997] 3 SLR(R) 138, [1997] SGHC 255 6.119, 6.122

The Performing Right Society Ltd and another v United Artists Singapore Theatres Pte Ltd [2001] 1 SLR(R) 488, [2001] SGHC 54 6.29

Vestwin Trading Pte Ltd and another v Obegi Melissa and others [2006] 3 SLR(R) 573, [2006] SGHC 107 6.11

Woo Kah Wai and another v Chew Ai Hua Sandra and another appeal [2014] 4 SLR 166, [2014] SGCA 41 6.04

SOUTH AFRICA

 

American Natural Soda Ash Corporation and Another v Competition Commission of SA and Others 2005 (6) SA 158 (SCA) 7.86

Bronner Case (C-7/97) [1998] ECR I-7791, ECJ 7.73

Competition Commission of South Africa v Yara South Africa (Pty) LTD & Omnia Fertilizer Ltd, (93/CAC/Mar10) 7.53

Competition Commission v Computicket (Pty) Ltd (853/2013) [2014] ZASCA 185 (26 November 2014) 7.55

DW Integrators CC vs SAS Institute (Pty) Ltd Case 14/IR/November 1999 7.83

Freefall Trading 211 (Pty) Ltd v Proplink Publishing (Pty) Ltd 881 JOC (C) 7.20

King v South African Weather Service 2009 (3) SA 13 (SCA) 7.24

Mandla-Matla Publishing (Pty) Ltd and Independent Newspapers (Pty) Ltd (48/CR/Jun04) [2006] ZACT 84 (6 November 2006) 7.73–7.79

Nedschroef Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd v Teamcor Ltd, Case No. 95/IR/Oct. 05 7.86

Primedia Ltd and Others v Competition Commission and Another (39/AM/MAY06) [2008] ZACT 30 (9 May 2008) 7.62–7.65

Replication Technology Group (Pty) Ltd v Gallo Africa Ltd, Case No. 92/IR/Sep. 07 7.86

Sasol Chemical Industries Ltd v Competition Commission (131/CAC/Jun14) [2015] ZACAC 4; 2015 (5) SA 471 (CAC) (17 June 2015) 7.81

UNITED KINGDOM

 

Byrne v Statist Co [1914] 1 KB 622 6.20, 6.29

Cesinsky v G Routledge & Sons [1916] 2 KB 325 6.41

Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2001] QB 967 6.11

Elton John v Richard Leon James [1991] FSR 397 6.54, 6.55

Griggs Group Ltd v Evans [2005] EWCA Civ 11, [2005] FSR 31 6.08, 6.20

Instone v A Schroeder Music Publishing Co Ltd [1974] 1 All ER 171 6.55

Noah v Shuba [1991] FSR 14 6.20, 6.29

O’Sullivan v Management Agency and Music Ltd [1984] 3 WLR 448; [1985] 3 All ER 351 6.54, 6.55

Robin Ray v Classic FM [1998] EWHC Patents 333, [1998] FSR 622 6.08, 6.20

Schroeder Music Publishing Co v Macaulay [1974] 1 WLR 1308 6.53

Silverstone Records Ltd v Mountfield [1993] EMLR 152 6.54

SSSL Realisations (2002) Ltd (in liquidation) [2006] EWCA Civ 7, [2006] 2 WLR 1369 6.116

Stevenson Jordan & Harrison Ltd v MacDonald & Evans [1951] 68 RPC 190 6.29

Winter Garden Theatre (London) Ltd v Millennium Productions Ltd [1948] AC 173 6.46

Zang Tumb Tuum Records Ltd v Holly Johnson [1993] EMLR 61 6.53

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

Alden-Rochelle Inc. v ASCAP, 80 F. Supp. 888 (S.D.N.Y. 1948) 8.104, 8.105, 8.106

Amicus Brief of the United States of America Regarding Proposed Amended Settlement Agreement at 1, Authors Guild, Inc., et al. v Google, Inc, 05 Civ. 8136 (DC) (S.D.N.Y. February 4, 2010) 8.84

Aspen Skiing Co. v Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585 (1985) 8.81

Authors Guild, Inc., et al. v Google, Inc., 954 F. Supp. 2d 282 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 8.84

Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litig, In re, 186 F.3d 781 (7th Cir. 1999) 8.92

Broad Music, Inc. v Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc., 441 U.S. 1 (1979) 8.107, 8.108

Buffalo Broad Co., Inc. v ASCAP, 744 F.2d 917 (2nd Cir. 1984) 8.108

California Motor Transport Co. v Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508 (1972) 8.90

Cardizem CD Antitrust Litig., In re 105 F.Supp.2d 618 (E.D. Mich. 2000) 8.90, 8.91

Copperweld Corp. v Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752 (1984) 8.80

Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 (1961) 8.89, 8.90, 8.92, 8.93

Ford Motor Co. v US, 405 U.S. 562 (1972) 8.82

FTC v Actavis, 133 S.Ct. 2223 (US 2013) 8.80

FTC v Superior Court Trial Lawyers Ass'n, 493 U.S. 411 (1990) 8.92

Global Music Rights, LLC v Radio Music License Committee, Inc et al, No. 09051-BRO-AS (C.D. Cal. filed Dec. 6, 2016) 8.114

Hanover 3201 Realty, LLC v Village Supermarkets, Inc., 806 F.3d 162 (3rd Cir. 2015) 8.93

Indep. Serv Orgs Antitrust Litig., In Re 203 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2000) 8.87

Leegin Creative Leather Prods v PSKS, Inc, 551 U.S. 877 (2007) 8.79

Meredith Corp. v SESAC, 1 F. Supp. 3d 180 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) 8.110–8.112

Monsanto Co. v Spray-Rite Service Corp., 465 U.S. 752 (1984) 8.112

Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., 508 U.S. 49 (1993) 8.90, 8.93

Radio Music License Committee, Inc v. Global Music Rights, LLC, No. 06076-CDJ (E.D. Pa. filed Nov. 18, 2016) 8.114

RMLC v SESAC, 29 F.Supp.3d 487 (E.D. Pa. 2014) 8.113

Texas Indus. v Radcliff Materials, Inc., 451 U.S. 630, 635 (1981) 8.85

United Mine Workers of America v Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 (1965) 8.89, 8.90, 8.92, 8.93

United States v Microsoft Corp., 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001) 8.87

US v ASCAP, 2001–2 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 73, 474, Sections IV, VI, VII, & IV (S.D.N.Y. 11 June 2001)    8.102

US v BMI, 1996–1 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 71, 378, Sections IV, VIII(B), & XIV (S.D.N.Y. 18 November 1994)    8.102

US v BMI, 2016–2 Trade Cases P 79, 757, 2016 WL 4989938 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2016) 8.114

US v E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377 (1956) 8.81

US v Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563 (1966) 8.81

US v United Shoe Mach. Corp., 391 U.S. 244 (1968) 8.82

WTO

 

WTO Dispute DS362: China – Intellectual Property Rights 1.139