With all the fun and games in Europe it is quite tough (in an austerity Britain keep calm & carry on, we will fight them on the beaches (?) etc etc) to focus on the apparently esoteric issue of costs awards in Newzbin 2.
As all the avid readers of this blog will know BT got thumped by the Studios in the summer in terms of their obligations to protect copyright. They have just received "the extras" from Hon Justice Arnold as follows;
"Each side contends that the other should pay the costs of implementing the order. In my judgment the costs of implementing the order should be borne by BT. The Studios are enforcing their legal and proprietary rights as copyright owners and exclusive licensees, and more specifically their right to relief under Article 8(3). BT is a commercial enterprise which makes a profit from the provision of the services which the operators and users of Newzbin2 use to infringe the Studios' copyright. As such, the costs of implementing the order can be regarded as a cost of carrying on that business."
This is a major win for all creators and owners of intellectual property rights and all attempts to water down the impact of the decision against BT in the summer (let's beat them on admin and implementation in typical BT fashion) were given short shrift by the Court. The evidence of a Mr. McMahon for BT was considered "inaccurate" and attempts to get round the blocking by mixing up destination URL's was rejected - a url must be blocked if its predominant purpose is to facilitate access to NewzBin 2.
Full text of the decision can be accessed here with a few other useful links. A good day for the creative industries.
As all the avid readers of this blog will know BT got thumped by the Studios in the summer in terms of their obligations to protect copyright. They have just received "the extras" from Hon Justice Arnold as follows;
"Each side contends that the other should pay the costs of implementing the order. In my judgment the costs of implementing the order should be borne by BT. The Studios are enforcing their legal and proprietary rights as copyright owners and exclusive licensees, and more specifically their right to relief under Article 8(3). BT is a commercial enterprise which makes a profit from the provision of the services which the operators and users of Newzbin2 use to infringe the Studios' copyright. As such, the costs of implementing the order can be regarded as a cost of carrying on that business."
This is a major win for all creators and owners of intellectual property rights and all attempts to water down the impact of the decision against BT in the summer (let's beat them on admin and implementation in typical BT fashion) were given short shrift by the Court. The evidence of a Mr. McMahon for BT was considered "inaccurate" and attempts to get round the blocking by mixing up destination URL's was rejected - a url must be blocked if its predominant purpose is to facilitate access to NewzBin 2.
Full text of the decision can be accessed here with a few other useful links. A good day for the creative industries.