

News Archive
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
Google Gains Ground in Germany & US on Copyright & Trademark
April 30, 2010, 3:32 pm
Google saw two legal victories this week in copyright and trademark issues.
In the first case, a German artist uploaded large images of her paintings to her website. When Google Image Search displayed thumbnails of those images, she sued for copyright infringement. The German Supreme Court ruled against the artist. As Google says in their European Public Policy blog:
Today´s ruling makes it clear not just for Google, its users in Germany and all owners of websites containing images, but also for all providers of image search services operating in the country: showing thumbnail images within search results is legitimate and millions of users in Germany benefit from being able to discover visual information at the click of a mouse.
The full reasoning behind the decision is yet to come.
The second IP victory for Google came from the US. Rosetta Stone, language learning software company, sued Google for allowing competitors to bid on their trademarked name. Google was granted their motion for summary judgment, according to Business Week.
The ruling means that the case will not be heard by a jury. Instead, a judge will decide the case. The final verdict is still pending, but things may look good for Google there, too. Summary judgment is only granted when, according to Wikipedia:
1. there are no issues of “material” fact requiring a trial for their resolution, and
2. in applying the law to the undisputed facts, one party is clearly entitled to judgment.
Again, the final verdict is still pending.
What do you think? Will the second case go in Google’s favor, too?






