Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comment on the Judgment of the Danish Supreme Court Decision – Coop v. K.H. Würtz, Case 171/2017

  • Case Note
  • Published:
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. The present comment draws on the Danish-language comment by Jørgen Blomqvist and Morten Rosenmeier in Nordiskt Immateriellt Rättskydd (forthcoming) where detailed references to Danish and Nordic case law and literature may be found. For a translation of this decision into English see this issue of IIC at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-019-00888-9.

  2. All illustrations of the uses are found in the (Danish-language) version of the judgment available at the Supreme Court’s webpage; seehttp://www.hoejesteret.dk/hoejesteret/nyheder/Afgorelser/Pages/Brugafregiimarkedsfoering1.aspx.

  3. Coop also claimed that the suit was statute-barred. In addition, the case involved the issues of infringement of the Danish Marketing Practices Act. These issues are not discussed in the following where focus is on the copyright questions.

  4. Michel M. Walther and Silke von Lewinski, European Copyright Law, a Commentary, 2010, Oxford University Press, Oxford p. 1053.

  5. The question whether limitations based on a legal practice must be covered by Art. 5 InfoSoc Directive is discussed in detail below in Sect. 6.

  6. See Rosenmeier and Blomqvist, supra note 1 with references.

  7. Ibid.

  8. Supra note 1.

  9. This particular category has been stated to find support in Sec. 23(3) DKCA on the use of “subordinate importance” in newspapers, periodicals, films and television.

  10. See e.g. the decision from the Swedish Supreme Court reported in Nordiskt Immateriellet Rättskydd 2016, p. 305 ff.

  11. E.g. C-117/13 (Ulmer); C-527/15 (Filmspeler) para. 62 f.; and C-265/16 (VCAST) para. 31 f. See also C-435/12 (Stichting de Thuiskopie) para. 20 ff.

  12. See e.g. C-145/10 (Painer) para. 129 ff.; and C-469/17 (Funke Medien) in particular para. 49.

  13. C-476/17 (Pelham), para. 63.

  14. See, for example, Art. 31(3)(b) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties regarding the role of subsequent practice in the interpretation of treaties.

  15. See Jacob Linkis, Dansk Ophavsrets Fleksibilitet, Copenhagen 2016 p. 103 f.

  16. C-469/17 (Funke Medien) at 47; C-516/17 (Spiegel Online) at 32 f.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Affiliated Professor, Center for Information and Innovation Law (CIIR), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Jørgen Blomqvist

  2. Professor, Center for Information and Innovation Law (CIIR), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Morten Rosenmeier & Jens Schovsbo

Authors
  1. Jørgen Blomqvist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Morten Rosenmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jens Schovsbo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jørgen Blomqvist.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Blomqvist, J., Rosenmeier, M. & Schovsbo, J. Comment on the Judgment of the Danish Supreme Court Decision – Coop v. K.H. Würtz, Case 171/2017. IIC 51, 128–136 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-019-00887-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-019-00887-w

Search

Navigation