EU IP-PorTal’s Post

New from me: Ofcom has announced some changes to its shared access licensing (SAL) regime. Although Ofcom is making several changes to the SAL process, the proposal does not appear to include a commitment to automate it. This is despite the (previous) UK government urging Ofcom to do so in 2023. “We remain committed to making our licensing procedures smoother and more responsive, with more automation where that can help licensees,” an Ofcom spokesperson said. “End-to-end automation will require a significant development of our tools and processes and applications would still take time to process, given the steps involved.” As a first step, “we are moving the foundations of our spectrum management platform into a more online environment in the coming months, with the front end opened up for users to manage their applications as they move through the licensing cycle,” the spokesperson added. https://lnkd.in/ex-MmmTP

Motion to Exclude Damages Expert Granted - TexIPLawBlog.com Magistrate Judge Lane granted the motion as to the plaintiff's damages expert, applying the recently amended FRE 702, which requires that the proponent bear the burden of showing the expert testimony more likely than not complies with the rule. He concluded that the plaintiff's expert was improperly using sales of products which were not accused of infringement as the royalty base to determine damages, rejecting the expert's opinion, which relied on the premise that because the accused features allowed Microsoft to achieve more of a specific, albeit unaccused feature on a server, that the accused features could be valued based on the amount of a specified unaccused feature on the network. https://lnkd.in/ghthcJ6M #WDTX #TexIPLawBlog

The Department of Telecommunications had published the draft Temporary Suspension of Telecommunication Services Rules, 2024 through the Official Gazette on 29/08/2024 inviting suggestions and objections from stakeholders; SFLC.in also submitted its stance on the draft Rules highlighting various concerns with the draft Rules. On November 22nd, 2024, the Department of Telecommunications published Temporary Suspension of Telecommunication Services Rules, 2024 taking into account the suggestions received. Pertinently, the first change in the new Rules is the inclusion of Section 20(4) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, which entails the action specified for such duration and in such manner as may be prescribed. The changes being made from the previous draft rules are as follows: The specific type of telecommunication services to be suspended have to be notified in the suspension order. Including the suggestions made in the case of Anuradha Bhasin, the issuing authority can only publish a suspension order only after ascertaining that the objectives for implementing internet suspension cannot be achieved by any other reasonable means. On a welcome note, a few of the objections and suggestions as highlighted above from the stakeholders have been accepted by the DoT. There are still pertinent issues which are still left unaddressed, such as the independence of the Review Committee. To read more about the suggestions and objections put forward by SFLC.in, please refer to the link below. https://lnkd.in/dAmkvffs

Data (Use and Access) Bill This week the UK's new data Bill, aimed at unlocking the power of data, particularly for public services, in order to boost the UK economy, had its first reading in the House of Lords. Welcomed by the ICO https://lnkd.in/er9nVGVy it leverages much of the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill that did not make it through Parliament before the change of government. The Bill will bring changes to a number of sectors, all with the aim of reducing bureaucracy and red tape when it comes to data sharing. Key principles behind the Bill include: 👩⚕️ Improving public services: It should become easier for NHS staff and the police to access personal data to help them carry out their work (for example, ensuring that patient records can easily be accessed in real-time across NHS trusts, and removing the manual logging requirements for police when they are accessing personal data to work on a case). It's estimated that these measures will free up 1.5 million hours of police time, and 140,000 NHS staff hours every year. 📈Growing the economy: New Smart Data Powers (which will allow businesses and consumers to share their data with authorised third parties) and the National Underground Asset Register (a new digital service which will provide instant access to a map of underground pipes and cables for authorised users) are estimated to bring a £10 billion boost to the UK economy across 10 years. 🆔 Making lives easier: The Bill attempts to simplify daily tasks by reducing administrative burdens (digital verification will be legislated, and digital identity providers will also need to be certified against a “trust framework” ). 💻 Access to data for research into online safety: The government plans to create a researcher data access regime, in order to help researchers investigate online harms. Researchers will have better access to data held by online platforms so they can conduct proper research into online safety trends. Keep an eye out for our Law-Nows on the new Bill ... #data #datauseandaccessbill #cms #CMSlaw #digitalID

Modernising the administering of oaths: Navigating Technology and Tradition The rapid technological advancements of recent years have revolutionised society, particularly in the realm of communications. However, legislation hasn’t always kept pace with these changes. One such piece of legislation is the Justices of the Peace and Commissioners of Oaths Act 16 of 1963. This Act governs the appointment, powers, and duties of justices of the peace and commissioners of oaths in South Africa. Specifically, it requires oaths to be administered in the physical presence of a commissioner of oaths. But what happens when technology allows for virtual interactions? In a recent Court application, the applicant sought that it be declared that the words “in the presence of” in Regulation 3 of the Regulations Governing the Administering of an Oath or Affirmation, are to be broadly interpreted to include the administration of an oath or affirmation by means of live electronic communication, consisting of simultaneous audio and visual components, such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams. The Court examined and analysed Regulation 3(1) of the Act and highlighted the importance of place - the physical presence or proximity of the commissioner - when administering oaths, emphasising that the wording of the Regulation leaves no room for alternative meanings. The applicant’s counterargument was intriguing. They proposed that virtual means could achieve the Act’s objectives. After all, a commissioner could identify the deponent, confirm their familiarity with the affidavit’s contents, and witness their electronic signature. However, the Court rejected this view. To do otherwise, it was held, would blur the line between interpretation and legislation, disregarding the clear intent of the words in the Regulations. In the end, the Court dismissed the application. While technology evolves, the law remains anchored in its language - a reminder that even in our digital age, tradition and clarity matter.

Under the EU's Digital Services Act, users who disagree with a platform's content moderation decision about their content or reports can make the platform engage in an out-of-court dispute resolution process. The platform pays, even if the user's claim fails. It looks like we now have two officially approved providers for these dispute-resolution processes. One is in Malta, and the other is in Hungary. Users from anywhere in the EU can choose these forums for their disputes. This initial list of countries should perhaps give us some pause. Hungary is the one country in the EU that is listed as only "Partially Free" (as opposed to "Free") in Freedom House's annual ranking for political rights and civil liberties. It is a serious outlier in terms of fundamental rights protections. https://lnkd.in/g3NTjzpF Malta sounds pretty nice from a distance and has a comfortable 87 in the Freedom House ranking -- putting it behind Barbados, Tuvalu, and Cape Verde, and ahead of the United States. However, it also has a problematic record of official corruption, state entanglement with business and financial interests, and mistreatment of journalists who report on that topic. This came to light most dramatically after the 2017 murder of reporter Daphne Caruana Galizia. https://lnkd.in/gjZeZuzD. The Reporters Without Borders index ranks Malta a relatively dismal 73rd in the world for press freedom. https://rsf.org/en/index. My concerns about the DSA's Article 21 dispute resolution process have always been pretty dry and technocratic. I worry about inefficiency, effectiveness in resolving important free expression issues, and incentives for the parties involved (especially the dispute resolution provider). Daniel Holznagel makes a strong version of that critique below. But the happenstance of Malta and Hungary being first out of the gate seems like a good moment to think more about the entanglement of state and private business entities in this new role under the DSA, and implications for Internet users' rights.

🆕 The PM’s new ministerial code unveiled today includes some new and welcome commitments but this is very much a first step in what needs to be an ambitious upgrade of the UK’s standards framework. Here’s Spotlight’s highlights 👍 and lowlights 👎: 👍 Independent Adviser does have genuinely new powers – including launching investigations without the PM’s consent, increased access to evidence, advising if there has been a breach and more freedom to suggest a sanction be considered. 👍 There is increased transparency – with ministerial interests published quarterly rather than six monthly and monthly declarations for hospitality and gifts. 👍 New duties on candour, transparency and openness, as well as ensuring government resources are not used for party political purposes, and providing timely responses to select committees, correspondence and written questions. 👍 The new Ministerial code has been fundamentally restructured with ethical guidelines front and centre. ⚠️ But… 👎 There’s no legislative change to the status of the code and no legislative requirement for the PM to issue one. 👎 There are no sanctions or ministerial deed for breaking the business appointment rules.  👎 nothing on a new independent appointment process for the Independent Adviser or duty to publish findings within eight weeks as recommended by the Committee on Standards in Public Life. 🗣️ We urge the government to lay out a clear timeline for introducing further ambitious recommendations by CSPL on transparency in lobbying, public appointments, and creating legally binding commitments on the revolving door, as well as on its proposed Ethics & Integrity Commission. 🎯 Most importantly, the new government must ensure that its upgrades to standards are enshrined in legislation that leaves a lasting legacy for future governments to follow. This must include putting standards regulators on a statutory footing and ensuring they are resourced properly to do their job. ✅ ❌ We marked the last government’s homework on these issues with our Integrity Deferred and Integrity Lite reports and will do the same for this one. Keep your eyes peeled for an update. #ministerialcode #standards #ethics #integrity

Microsoft To Be Sued For 'Inflating' Price Of Software License Microsoft is set to face a multibillion-pound #ClassAction case brought by a former U.K. prosecutor over allegations that the tech giant illegally inflated the prices of software licenses, lawyers who plan to represent consumers said on Monday. Alexander Wolfson, a former Crown Prosecution Service barrister, intends to file collective proceedings in the Competition Appeal Tribunal on behalf of thousands of public and private organizations in the U.K. that purchased software licenses. The software licenses include those for Office and Windows, according to his legal team. Kate Pollock of Stewarts Law LLP, which is representing Wolfson, said that the case "could have a great impact on the fairness of the U.K.'s growing digital economy. Almost all organizations in the U.K. rely on the use of computer software, and it would be impossible for those affected by this harm to take individual action over the inflated prices we believe they were forced to pay by Microsoft." To learn more about Law360 UK and MLex reporting on #ClassAction cases please connect with me for an initial consultation. #Competition #Antitrust #ClassAction #InflatedPricing

In continuation of promotion of Digital base and E-facilities, MCA has created a new Platform called “ADJUDICATION PLATFORM” by way of insertion of Rule 3A Companies (Adjudication of Penalties) Rules, 2014 By virtue of this platform, all proceedings (including issue of notices, filing replies or documents, evidences, holding of hearing, attendance of witnesses, passing of orders and payment of penalty) of adjudicating officer and Regional Director under these rules shall take place in ELECTRONIC MODE ONLY THROUGH THE E-ADJUDICATION PLATFORM DEVELOPED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT FOR THIS PURPOSE. However, the proceedings pending before the Adjudicating Officer or (Regional Director) on September 16, 2024 shall continue as per provisions of these rules existing prior to the commencement of e-adjudication process. What if in case (the email) address is not available with ministry for the concerned persons? Ans: In such cases the adjudicating officer shall send the notice by post at the last intimated address or address available in the records What if; in case no address of the person concerned is available with ministry ? Ans: The notice shall be placed on the e-adjudication platform

We are happy to share that our colleague Julia Wildgans has co-authored Chapter 3 on “Liability of providers of intermediary services” in the recently published Practitioner’s Guide to the Digital Services Act. The chapter provides a detailed overview of the exemptions from liability under Articles 4-6 of the Digital Services Act, explaining the conditions and limitations under which access and hosting providers are not liable for illegal content. It also explores the implications of voluntary investigation by providers and emphasizes that they are under no general obligation to monitor the information they transmit or store, nor to actively seek facts indicating illegal activity. The guide, published by Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, offers practical insights to help companies navigate the DSA with confidence. We are proud to share these insights with you today and look forward to contributing to the ongoing dialogue on platform liability in the future. Congratulations to Julia Wildgans and everyone involved in the publication. #publication #DSA #IPlaw #compliance #Nomos