Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
IEHC 54 ECLI:IE:HC:2018:54 KI-generiert

High Court orders ISPs to block copyright infringing content under Section 40(5)(a) of the 2000 Act.

Geschäftsnummer IEHC 54
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Irland (IE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Gutgeheissen (Allowed)
Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The High Court granted the plaintiffs' request for an order compelling Irish ISPs to block access to specific copyright infringing websites. The court found that the ISPs' networks were actively being used to distribute unlawful material, creating a significant public interest in preventing such infringement. Consequently, the judge approved the proposed order, confirming it would not impose an unreasonable burden on the ISPs or deprive users of lawfully accessible content.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Section 40(5)(a) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000; The court held that ISPs must comply with orders to block access to websites identified as hosting copyright infringing material to serve the public interest in protecting creative rights.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Copyright Infringement ISP Blocking Orders Section 40(5)(a) Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 Public Interest Content Blocking Digital Rights

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Section 40(5)(a) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000
I will make the order sought under Section 40(5)(a) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 (as amended) in terms of the draft
Related Rights Act 2000
I will make the order sought under Section 40(5)(a) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 (as amended) in terms of the draft

Zitierte Rechtsprechung

KI-generiert
The Football Association Premier League Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc & Ors [2017] EWHC 480 (Ch)
[2017] EWHC 480
Association Premier League Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc & Ors [2017] EWHC 480 (Ch).

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

[2018] IEHC 54

THE HIGH COURT

Record Number: 2017/11701 P

BETWEEN:

TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION

UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP

UNIVERSAL CABLE PRODUCTIONS, LLC

WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.

PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION

DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC

COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.

SONY PICTURES TELEVISION INC.

PLAINTIFFS

- AND –

EIRCOM LIMITED TRADING AS EIR

DIGIWEB LIMITED

IMAGINE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMTIED

SKY SUBSCRIBERS SERVICES LIMITED

VIRGIN MEDIA IRELAND LIMITED

VODAFONE IRELAND LIMITED

MAGNET NETWORKS LIMITED

THREE IRELAND (HUTCHISON) LIMITED

THREE IRELAND SERVICES (HUTCHISON) LIMITED

DEFENDANTS

Ex-tempore judgment of Mr. Justice McGovern delivered on 15 January 2018

Having read the affidavits, legal submissions and draft order as well as on hearing counsel for the Plaintiffs, I am satisfied that the

Defendant ISPs networks are being used to infringe copyright and that the proposed order will have the effect of preventing access

to or at least make it difficult to access unlawful material and so, would discourage users from doing so.

I am also satisfied that the order would not place an unreasonable burden on the ISPs and that it would not deprive users from

lawfully accessing copyright content on the internet.

I agree that public policy supports preventing copyright infringement for the reasons set out by Mr. Justice Arnold in The Football

Association Premier League Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc & Ors [2017] EWHC 480 (Ch). Similar comments were made by Mr

Justice Cregan and Mr Justice Kelly as well as myself in other cases similar to this.

There is a significant public interest in preventing the internet from being used for infringement of copyright. Such activity has a

detrimental effect on the rights of creative artists to benefit from their creativity. It also interferes with the artists’ livelihoods and

interferes with other legitimate businesses that disseminate their material.

I will make the order sought under Section 40(5)(a) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 (as amended) in terms of the draft

order and draft protocol as presented.