Microsoft bans used games, here

CJEU Referral in Huawei v. ZTE Concerning FRAND

Here (German)., here.
See also, here and, here (German).
My quick reading of the CJEU referral, based on the translation of the Court's order as kindly made available by Fosspatents.
The questions essentially revolve around the concept of “willing licensee” against which the SEP (standard essential patent) owner has been seeking an injunction. The concept at issue can obviously have even dramatically different shades and meanings. In fact, it can range from a mere “(oral) declaration in broad and general terms indicating the [the potential licensee’s] willingness to enter into negotiations” to “a binding offer to the SEP owner on terms that the SEP owner cannot refuse without treating the infringer unfairly or discriminatorily”, furthermore requiring that “the infringer, in anticipation of the license he is seeking, already complies with his contractual obligations with respect to past acts of infringement.” 

A middle ground could be the requirement that “the infringer has indeed entered into negotiations, such as by, for example, communicating terms and conditions under which he is prepared to conclude a license agreement.”

In the event that “the [infringer's] submission of a binding offer to conclude a license agreement is a requirement” it would then be necessary to clarify whether that offer should “involve specific substantive and/or chronological requirements”, whether it would “have to set forth all of the commercial terms that in accordance with relevant industry practice are usually set forth in such license agreements,” and whether it could “be conditioned upon actual use and/or validity of the SEP-in-suit”. Moreover, “in the event that the infringer's [precontractual] fulfillment of obligations arising from the requested license is a requirement” for the finding of a “willing licensee,” the Court asks whether the infringer could be “required, in particular, to make disclosures relating to past acts of infringement and/or to pay [precontractual] royalties”, and, finally, whether the “obligation to pay [precontractual] royalties” could also “be fulfilled by giving security.”

Text-mining spat heats up, here

Open Letter to Vice-President Almunia from 11 Complainants (Foundem/Google), here

US Court decision on electronic press clippings

AP v Meltwater, AP Press Release here

Qualcomm and BlackBerry back Google against Judge Posner and Apple on FRAND patents, here.

Stellungnahme des MPI zum Referentenentwurf für einen „3. Korb“


Coordinating Extensive Trademark Rights and Competition Policy

K. Li, here

Parallel Exclusion

S. Hemphill, T. Wu, here.

"In industries marked by rapid technological change, the exclusion of entrants has a far greater impact on the development of the industry. In these industries, exclusion, not price-fixing, is the “supreme evil” that antitrust should address.", p. 1212.

Supreme Court on the "first sale" doctrine and copyrighted works lawfully made abroad

Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., No. 11–697, here.

The questions:
"Putting section numbers to the side, we ask whether
the “first sale” doctrine applies to protect a buyer or other
lawful owner of a copy (of a copyrighted work) lawfully
manufactured abroad. Can that buyer bring that copy
into the United States (and sell it or give it away) without
obtaining permission to do so from the copyright owner?
Can, for example, someone who purchases, say at a used
bookstore, a book printed abroad subsequently resell it
without the copyright owner’s permission?", p. 6.

The answer:
"In our view, the answers to these questions are, yes. We
hold that the “first sale” doctrine applies to copies of a
copyrighted work lawfully made abroad."

Some competition scholar's highlights:

"The “first sale” doctrine is a common-law doctrine with
an impeccable historic pedigree", p. 18.
"American law too has generally thought that com­petition, including freedom to resell, can work to the ad­vantage of the consumer", p. 19.
"the Constitution’s language
nowhere suggests that its limited exclusive right should
include a right to divide markets or a concomitant right
to charge different purchasers different prices for the same
book, say to increase or to maximize gain...(T)o the contrary, Congress enacted a copyright law that
(through the “first sale” doctrine) limits copyright holders’
ability to divide domestic markets. And that limitation is
consistent with antitrust laws that ordinarily forbid mar­ket divisions.", p. 32.

LG suspects Samsung of infringing its eye-tracking patents with the Galaxy S 4, here

General Court on the "Bananas Cartel"

Case T‑588/08, Dole Food Company, Inc., and Dole Germany OHG, v European Commission, here

Fixing the Worst Law in Technology

T. Wu, here

Book Review: Is Copyright Reform Possible?

P. Samuelson, here

The SHIELD Act: When Bad Economic Studies Make Bad Laws, here

The Register’s Call for Updates to U.S. Copyright Law

M. Pallante, here.

Some general points:
- Because the dissemination of content is so
pervasive to life in the 21st century, the law also should be less technical and more helpful to those who need to navigate it.
- central equation for Congress to consider is what does and does not belong under a copyright owner’s control in the digital age
- apply fresh eyes to the next great copyright act to ensure that
the copyright law remains relevant and functional
- keeping the public
interest at the forefront, including how to define the public interest and who may speak for it
- possible and necessary to have a copyright law that combinessafeguards for free
expression, guarantees of due process, mechanisms for access, and respect for intellectual
- authors are intertwined with the interests of the public. As the first beneficiaries of the copyright
law, they are not a counterweight to the public interest but instead are at the very center of the

To do list:
- clarifying the scope of exclusive rights revising exceptions and
limitations for libraries and archives, addressing orphan works, accommodating persons who
have print disabilities, providing guidance to educational institutions, exempting incidental
copies in appropriate instances, updating enforcement provisions, providing guidance on
statutory damages, reviewing the efficacy of the DMCA, assisting with small copyright claims,
reforming the music marketplace, updating the framework for cable and satellite transmissions,
encouraging new licensing regimes, and improving the systems of copyright registration and

"Bold" adjustments to the general framework:
- reverting works to the public
domain after a period of life plus fifty years unless heirs or successors register their interests with  the Copyright Office
- requiring copyright owners to object or “opt
out” in order to prevent certain uses, whether paid or unpaid, by educational institutions or  libraries

Digital Music Consumption on the Internet: Evidence from Clickstream Data

L. Aguiar, B. Martens, here

The Next Great Copyright Act

M. Pallante, here

eBook Use and Acceptance in an Undergraduate Institution

Springer eBooks, here (pdf file).

Can I Get Some Privacy?

Stanford Magazine, here

Adding DRM to the HTML standard, here

Legal rights in big data: the elephant in the room, here

The Practical Implications of the FTC’s FRAND Settlements in the Google and Bosch/SPX Matters

B. Rafkin, here

The Right Tool for the Job: Limiting the Use of Section 5 of the FTC Act for Patent HoldUp Cases

W. Carson, here, p. 5 ff.

LA GRATUITE PEUT-ELLE AVOIR DES EFFETS ANTICONCURRENTIELS ? Une perspective d’économie industrielle sur le cas Google (Maps)

E. Malavolti, F. Marty, ici

House Hearing on Abusive Patent Litigation: A Report, here

The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan


Huawei wins German 4G (LTE) patent injunction against ZTE's base stations, here

Surprise: Register Of Copyrights Expected To Call For Reduction In Copyright Term, here

Three Reports on Parody

UK IPO, Evaluating the impact of parody on the exploitation of copyright works, here;  The Treatment of Parodies Under Copyright Law in Seven Jurisdictions, here;  Copyright and the Economic Effects of Parody, here.

Private Copying

UK IPO, here

Resolución - Liga Futbol Profesional

CNC, aquì (ficha pdf)

Au nom du droit à l'oubli, quel patrimoine pour l'Europe de demain ?

Association des archivistes français, ici

Open Data : les prix des stations essence restent payants, et chers, ici

La reforma de la ley de propiedad intelectual enciende al sector, aquì.

Vickers: UK banking reform on track but Europe questions remain open, here

Datenschutz in Europa stärken

Pressemitteilung, Konferenz der Datenschutzbeauftragten des Bundes und der Länder, hier

The Use and Threat of Injunctions in the Rand Context

J. Ratliff, D. Rubinfeld, here

European Antitrust Control and Standard Setting

M. Mariniello, here

The newsonomics of a news company of the future, here

Guide: Data Culture

Rapporteur: Camille Domange, ici

The Competition Act 2002, ten years later: lessons from the Irish experience of prosecuting cartels as criminal offences

T. Calvani and K. Carl, here

Opinion 02/2013 on apps on smart devices

Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, here

Summary of the E-Books Commission Decision

Case COMP/39.847, here

Product Certification – the next big standard-setting debate?, here

Avis sur la neutralité du Net

Conseil national du numérique, ici

ITC postpones Samsung-Apple ruling, here

Professor Petra Moser on the Effects of Copyright Extensions

WIPO, Video here

Telecomunicaciones y competencia: iniciativa histórica

M. Flores Bernés, aquì.

Amazon's play for Web names could test antitrust law, here

Vous allez pouvoir revendre vos livres numériques… mais pas librement, ici.

Google Concedes That Drive-by Prying Violated Privacy, here

Workshop on Patent Thickets - Report

EPO Advisory Board, here. Recommendations on patent thickets here

Working together to reduce patent litigation

Google Public Policy Blog, here

IPTC study shows some social media networks remove rights information from photos

Media Release, here

On the proposed internet gTLD of .CLOUD, here

AG Mengozzi on the notion of equitable remuneration

ÏPKat, here

ECJ clarifies scope of communication to the public right, here

The EU's Data Protection Reform: Decision-Time is Now

V. Reding, here

Television broadcasters may prohibit the retransmission of their programmes by another company via the internet

Judgment in Case C-607/11, ITV Broadcasting Ltd and Others v TVCatchup Ltd, Press Release here.

EU Copyright Dialogue: The Great Sham(e), here

Letter from participants in response to “Licences for Europe- A Stakeholder Dialogue” text and data mining for scientific research purposes workshop, here

What Constitutes a Diligent Search Under Present and Proposed Orphan Work Regimes?

D. Hansen, G. Hinze, J.Urban, here

Japanese court deemed Samsung's delayed disclosure of essential patents abusive conduct, here

Standard Setting Organizations Can Help Solve the Standard Essential Patents Licensing Problem

K.-U. Kühn, F. Scott Morton, & H. Shelanski, here

Rapport sur les moyens de lutte contre le streaming et le téléchargement direct illicites

Hadopi, ici

Stop Being Evil: A Proposal for Unbiased Google Search

J. Hazan, here

LSR: Onlinedienste und Startups reagieren auf “irrsinniges Gesetz”, hier

BITKOM zur EU-Datenschutzreform

Wettbewerb schützt Konsumenten, hier

A Glorious Day for a Free Internet in Italy, here

In eigener Sache: Der Heise Zeitschriften Verlag und das Leistungsschutzrecht, hier

Leistungsschutzrecht aus Sicht einer Suchmaschine, hier

Web Privacy Becomes a Business Imperative, here.

The Digital Publishing Revolution Is Over, here.

Bausteine für ein modernes und faires Urheberrecht

Die grüne Bundestagsfraktion, hier.

An American Perspective from the Crossroads of Antitrust and Intellectual Property

A. Foer and K. Li, here

Driving innovation: How stronger laws help bring safer chemicals to market

B. Tuncak, here

BIS paper explains upcoming UK copyright reform, here

Bundestag verabschiedet Leistungsschutzrecht, hier

A Rational System of Design Patent Remedies

M. Lemley, here

Les données culturelles, absentes de la feuille de route du gouvernement sur l’Open Data, here

Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android face several hopeful challengers

The Economist, here