Representative matters
- PlayRight / Google v. Belgian state. Representation of De Acteursgilde, FACIR, De Muziekgilde and the Union des Artistes, acting jointly with PlayRight in this case before the Belgian Constitutional Court for the maintenance of national provisions transposing the DSM Directive in Belgian law. Briefs were exchanged. The case is still pending before the Belgian Constitutional Court (2023 to date).
- Anne Frank Fonds. v. Vereniging voor Onderzoek en Ontsluiting van Historische Teksten. We represent the Anne Frank Fonds in proceedings initiated by the Vereniging voor Onderzoek en Ontsluiting van Historische Teksten aiming to obtain a declaration of non-infringement. The Anne Frank Fonds seeks to condemn the infringement of the copyright of the manuscripts of Anne Frank by the Vereniging voor Onderzoek en Ontsluiting van Historische Teksten with the publication on their website of the manuscripts of Anne Frank (2022 to date).
- VUB – UZ Brussel v. Lantronix. Assistance to the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and its University Hospital Brussel (UZ Brussel) in the proceedings initiated by Lantronix before the Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) regarding the use of a software program. For the proceedings in Canada, we worked together with a team of Canadian lawyers. In the meantime parties settled the case (2023).
- PlayRight v. Brutele, VOO, Proximus and Orange. Representation of PlayRight in proceedings initiated on behalf of PlayRight against four (other than Telenet) cable distributors (Brutélé, Voo, Proximus and Orange) for the cable retransmission of its repertoire since 2015 without its authorisation or payment of remuneration. Cases are now joined before the French Brussels Company Court, also joined with proceedings launched by Proximus, Orange, Voo and Brutélé against PlayRight and Agicoa (collective management organisation of film producers) to impose judicial mediation regarding PlayRight’s tariff for cable retransmission. We exchanged briefs. In the meantime, settlement agreements were reached with all four cable distributors. (2022 to date).
- PlayRight v. Telenet. Represents PlayRight (collective management organisation of performers) in a dispute with cable company Telenet, concerning the communication to the public of protected performances by “direct injection”, including questions of law concerning the validity of “all-rights” agreements with broadcasters and the presumption of transfer of rights to film producers, before the Brussels Court of Appeal (2006 to date)
- Reprobel & SEMU. Assistance in their discussions with educational establishments that refuse to enter into licensing agreements for the production of copies of scores, which are currently covered by the publishers’ exclusive reproduction rights. Copyright in sheet music follows specific legal rules and enjoys special protection. And assistance in contacts with Belgian legislators about new legislative initiatives (2022).
- Copiebel (collective management organisation of book publishers). Assitance with its legal analysis of copyright and (digital) legal deposit requirements (2022).
- Promeco & Boxter v. Guy Laroche & Textiles Olivier Mercier. Represents a Belgian company in a trademark dispute, concerning the exhaustion of the trademark right and (non-) opposability of the limitations in the principal license to third parties, before the Brussels Court of Appeal (2017 to date).
- CHwapi v. SBIM. Represented CHwapi in negotiating an IT services contract with SBIM and a former employee (2019).
- SBS & Medialaan v. H. and S. (Showgemist). Acted successfully for SBS and Medialaan as civil parties/complainers in criminal proceedings against posting of TV broadcasts on torrent sites, resulting in conviction of the 2 defendants based on copyright, related rights and computer crime laws (2018).
- ERA Belgium v. The Brokery. Represented successfully ERA Belgium in a dispute regarding (denied) protection of computer software and interface before the court in Antwerp (2018).
- Chloé Matthieu v. LN Knits. Successfully represented Chloé Matthieu in a dispute over alleged copyright infringement by LN Knits (2017).
- PlayRight v. Agicoa & BAVP. Successfully intervened for PlayRight (collective management organisation of performers) in a dispute before the Constitutional Court of Belgium initiated by Agicoa and BAVP (collective management companies of film producers) against the Belgian State regarding the right to equitable remuneration for performers and producers and the non-transferable right to remuneration for cable retransmission for authors and performers (2016).
- EMI Music Publishing Belgium, Warner/Chappell Music Publishing Belgium, Sony/ATV Music Publishing Belgium v. S. Acquaviva and others. Successfully represented the music publishers who own a portion of the copyrights to Madonna’s song “Frozen” against a Belgian composer who claimed that Madonna infringed the copyright to his song “Ma vie fout l’camp.” The composer’s claim was dismissed, upheld by the Court of Cassation (2015).
- SBS Belgium v. Right Brain Interface (RBI) – administrative proceedings. Acted for SBS (private television broadcaster in Flanders), together with VRT and Medialaan, in a case brought by RBI against the Flemish Regulator for the Media (VRM) before the Council of State. RBI was convicted by VRM of violating Article 180 of the Flemish Media Decree (the so-called “signal integrity decree” (SBS was heard in these proceedings) (2015).
- SBS Belgium v. Telenet. Represented SBS (private television broadcaster in Flanders), together with VRT and Medialaan, before the Court of Arbitration in a dispute with Telenet requesting the annulment of article 180 of the Flemish media decree regarding signal integrity (case for which we actively intervened during the legislative process before the Flemish Parliament) (2014).
- SBS Belgium v. Right Brain Interface (RBI). Acted successfully for SBS (private television broadcaster in Flanders), together with VRT and Medialaan, in a dispute against RBI, which offered services related to television programs via the cloud without prior consent of the broadcasters, before the Commercial Court of Antwerp (2014).
- BWIN, Internet Opportunity Entertainment, Ladbrokes, Sporting Exchange, Victor Chandler, William Hill v. Real Madrid And Others: represented successfully six online betting companies hauled before the Belgian Courts by football clubs Real Madrid Football, Juventus, PSV Eindhoven and FC Porto Club and some of their players (e.g. Zinedine Zidane and David Beckham), protesting inter alia against the use of the clubs’ and players’ names on the betting sites. The Liège Court of Appeal decided that the clients’ use of the names was merely informational and necessary and could therefore not constitute a trademark or personality right infringement (2009). However, the Belgian Supreme Court referred the matter to the Brussels Court of Appeal based on arguments of international jurisdiction (2012).
- BWIN, Internet Opportunity Entertainment, Ladbrokes, Sporting Exchange, Victor Chandler, William Hill v. Real Madrid And Others: successfully represented these online betting companies hauled before the Belgian Courts in similar proceedings (supra) initiated by the Fédération Française du Tennis (F.T.T.) which organizes the Roland Garros tournament (2008).
