<?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>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:35:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<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 [...]]]></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 &#8217;stakeholders&#8217;.  How we make them accountable for the decisions they make &#8211; or [...]]]></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[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eBusiness]]></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 companies [...]]]></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, and [...]]]></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>
		<item>
		<title>Apple, the iPod, and playing iTunes music on other devices</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/03/apple-the-ipod-and-playing-itunes-music-on-other-devices/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/03/apple-the-ipod-and-playing-itunes-music-on-other-devices/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2006 00:17:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/03/apple-the-ipod-and-playing-itunes-music-on-other-devices/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As we await the implementation of the OzDMCA, it&#8217;s been interesting to follow the debates, over in Europe and elsewhere, about Apple&#8217;s iTunes/iPod link.  The basic issue here is that iTunes-purchased music can only be played on Apple iPod players &#8211; unless, of course, you hack the Apple FairPlay encryption (which can be done [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/03/apple-the-ipod-and-playing-itunes-music-on-other-devices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Copyrighting &#8230; a fragrance?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/01/copyrighting-a-fragrance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/01/copyrighting-a-fragrance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 09:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today&#8217;s funny moment is from The Australian, which is carrying a story that French  cosmetic company L&#8217;Oreal has won a copyright suit against a Dutch company for copying a perfume. The story appears to have originated in The Times, but does not as yet appear to have been widely syndicated. The bizarre thing, of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/08/01/copyrighting-a-fragrance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SonyBMG merger voided by European court</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/07/14/sonybmg-merger-voided-by-european-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/07/14/sonybmg-merger-voided-by-european-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:02:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For the first time, the Court of First Instance has annuled the European Commission&#8217;s approval of a company merger. In January 2004, Sony and BMG notified the Commission that they intended to merge their worldwide music recording businesses (except for Japan) into a joint venture. In July 2004 the Commission approved the joint venture in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/07/14/sonybmg-merger-voided-by-european-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
