<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LawFont.com &#187; EU</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawfont.com/category/all-jurisdictions/eu/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawfont.com</link>
	<description>an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:57:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The French Republic v Weiler: further details</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/04/the-french-republic-v-weiler-further-details/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/04/the-french-republic-v-weiler-further-details/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=969</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Professor Joseph Weiler has now written about the judgment in the criminal libel case brought against him in a French court. A decision was handed down by the Tribunal de Grand Instance de Paris on 3 March 2011. The details of the matter are outlined in an earlier post. In short, Professor Weiler was sued [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/04/the-french-republic-v-weiler-further-details/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Journal editor wins defamation action in French court</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/04/journal-editor-wins-defamation-action-in-french-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/04/journal-editor-wins-defamation-action-in-french-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2011 23:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=935</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Professor Joseph Weiler has won the defamation action brought against him in a French court, which I discussed last month here. So far I have not been able to find any more details about the ruling, but once I do will write a longer post.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/04/journal-editor-wins-defamation-action-in-french-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Critical analysis or defamation?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/02/22/critical-analysis-or-defamation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/02/22/critical-analysis-or-defamation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=901</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is the line between academic criticism of a work and defamatory statements about the author? A French court is currently considering this issue. In 2007, a book review website, www.globallawbooks.org, published a review of a book by Dr. Karin N. Calvo-Goller about the International Crimimal Court. The review, written by Professor Thomas Weigend, then [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/02/22/critical-analysis-or-defamation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UK Professors&#8217; Open Letter on Copyright Term Extension</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/07/24/uk-professors-on-copyright-term-extension/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/07/24/uk-professors-on-copyright-term-extension/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=643</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a brief, excellent statement on why copyright term extension is a bad idea, written by a very authoritative, and not-at-all-radical-lefty-commie-pinko, law professors. As an Australian, I read it with interest, and some sadness &#8211; we are already protecting the &#8216;record companies, ageing rock stars or, increasingly, artistsâ€™ estates&#8217; via a term extension agreed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/07/24/uk-professors-on-copyright-term-extension/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Europe votes against &#8216;three strikes&#8217; policy for ISPs</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/04/14/europe-votes-against-three-strikes-policy-for-isps/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/04/14/europe-votes-against-three-strikes-policy-for-isps/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:54:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/04/14/europe-votes-against-three-strikes-policy-for-isps/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In case you hadn&#8217;t picked it up on the many places that have reported the news &#8211; the European Parliament has voted against a &#8216;three strikes&#8217; policy which would require ISPs to &#8216;terminate&#8217; internet access to repeat copyright infringers. Rapporteur Guy Bono commented: &#8216;The cut of Internet access is a disproportionate measure regarding the objectives. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/04/14/europe-votes-against-three-strikes-policy-for-isps/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New and interesting Patent Stats comparing USPTO, JPO, EPO and Australian Patent Office</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some colleagues of mine (Paul H. Jensen, Alfons Palangkaraya and Elizabeth Webster), from the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, have published a new Working Paper that would be of interest to people who, like me, are fascinated by international dynamics in patenting. The paper is called &#8216;Application pendency times and outcomes across [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ironic copyright comment of the day</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/15/ironic-copyright-comment-of-the-day/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/15/ironic-copyright-comment-of-the-day/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/15/ironic-copyright-comment-of-the-day/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On proposing a 95 year term for copyright in sound recordings: &#8220;I strongly believe that copyright protection for Europe&#8217;s performers represents a moral right to control the use of their work and earn a living from their performances&#8230;&#8221; [European commissioner Charlie McCreevy; press release here]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/15/ironic-copyright-comment-of-the-day/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A compendium of patent office cooperation &#8211; and some thoughts [updated]</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve become more interested in copyright bureaucracies, and patent and trade mark offices: how they operate; how transparent they are; who they are; how powers are divided between them; how they interact; how they characterise their role, their &#8216;customers&#8217;, and their &#8216;stakeholders&#8217;. How we make them accountable for the decisions they make &#8211; or how [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Building a better search engine</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/27/building-a-better-search-engine/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/27/building-a-better-search-engine/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:03:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[eBusiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/27/building-a-better-search-engine/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While Google is currently the dominant player in the Internet search engine business, that doesn&#8217;t mean that there is not a great deal of activity among companies vying for a piece of the action. As was recently reported, even 1% of the global search market represents quite a bit of money. Not all search engine [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/27/building-a-better-search-engine/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some matters of interest: open access in Australia; german copyright debate</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/12/06/some-matters-of-interest-open-access-in-australia-german-copyright-debate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/12/06/some-matters-of-interest-open-access-in-australia-german-copyright-debate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 04:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Source]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2006/12/06/some-matters-of-interest-open-access-in-australia-german-copyright-debate/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You will find, after a period of seriously heavy blogging recently owing to the Australian Copyright Amendment Bill, this blog will be a lot less active in the next while. I&#8217;m in Melbourne, but preparing for a permanent move to the University of Queensland, site of the excellent ACIPA research centre on IP in January, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/12/06/some-matters-of-interest-open-access-in-australia-german-copyright-debate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

