News

On October 9, a training session organized by MMC Polska took place. “Reform of the Code of Civil Procedure in practice – current challenges and planned changes in civil proceedings” is a very interesting topic. This time, the MSM law firm team presented the following issues: “e-Deliveries” – rules for delivering court documents via the Court Information Portal – explained by legal advisor Zuzanna Ochońska-Borowska; “Remote court proceedings – settlements, hearings, and closed sessions” – explained attorney Anna Pietrzyk. We would like to thank the organizers and participants for taking part in the training. More about MMC Polska at: https://mmcpolska.pl/

Addendum No. 10 is not uniform in nature. Prof. Ryszard Markiewicz points out some controversial issues related to fair use. These include, among others, the position that if a user has reasonable grounds to believe that they are using an illegal source of access, then there are no grounds for invoking fair use (including fair use for personal purposes). The basis for this restriction – in the absence of an explicit provision in this regard (under EU and Polish law) – is a three-step test. “Following T. Aplin and L. Bently, I also accept that fair use in the form of a quotation also covers modified fragments or even entire works, provided that they are recognizable as part of the work and, of course, the purposes of the quotation specified in the relevant provisions are also fulfilled. The basis for this interpretation is the possibility of defining quotation under EU law as a so-called autonomous concept. In light of the principle of proportionality, the freedom of independent artistic creation protected under fundamental rights should be taken into account here. I would also like to point out that in a number of cases there is an overlap between the scope of individual forms of fair use. The possibility of cumulative application of two forms of fair use is a completely different issue. In my next comments, I will write [probably] about whether fair use can be invoked in AI creations.” Link: https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/dozwolony-uzytek-w-prawie-autorskim-co-wolno-a-czego-nie,535807.html

Antitrust proceedings in two years? Is that even possible? Antitrust proceedings are not among the shortest, whether conducted by the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) or the European Commission. This is often due to their complexity, the vast amount of evidence, or the number of participants. Procedural fairness is extremely important, and the authorities should thoroughly investigate the case in order to assess it correctly, but the side effect is a long wait for a decision. The German Monopoly Commission has published the 14th edition of its “Policy Brief” – a document containing analyses and recommendations on competition law. It includes, among other things, suggestions for changes in antitrust proceedings conducted by the European Commission. The Monopoly Commission points out that the proceedings are too long, which results in the risk of irreversible damage to competition. The response is to be, among other things, the introduction of a two-year deadline for the EC to conduct proceedings. It is not known whether this recommendation will ever come into force, but a discussion on the duration of antitrust proceedings—also in Poland—is certainly needed, although shortening them without harming the rights of the parties and while ensuring the effectiveness of the authorities is a great challenge. What do you think about this? Are such proposals feasible in the reality of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection’s activities? The full text of the Policy Brief and all the proposals of the German Cartel Office can be found at the link in the first comment. Link to “Policy Brief”: https://www.monopolkommission.de/images/Policy_Brief/MK_Policy_Brief_14_en.pdf

Yesterday’s edition of Dziennik Gazeta Prawna featured an article by attorney Wiktoria Matysik on one of the latest amendments to the Civil Code and its impact on the system of protection of personal rights, including both common law and copyright. “In it, I write about why the accumulation of claims for compensation and payment for social purposes is permissible in the case of harm resulting from inducing sexual intercourse by deception and unlawful use of an image, but at the same time excluded in the case of damage to reputation—and what doubts this raises from the perspective of systemic consistency.” Link to the article: https://serwisy.gazetaprawna.pl/orzeczenia/artykuly/10586141,jak-zmiana-lub-na-albo-wywolala-chaos-w-systemie-ochrony-dobr-osob.html

I recently provided a comment to editor Tomasz Ciechoński on an article that appeared on the prawo.pl website concerning the issue of review bombing. What is it? Can you protect yourself against it? And what should you do if your rights are violated? Link to article: https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/ai-a-prawo-autorskie-prof-markiewicz-o-przypadku-beksinskiego,535172.html

I recently provided a comment to editor Tomasz Ciechoński on an article that appeared on the prawo.pl website concerning the issue of review bombing. What is it? Can you protect yourself against it? And what should you do if your rights are violated? Link to article: https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/review-bombing-jak-sie-bronic-przed-hejtem,535026.html

Yesterday, Dr. Michał Markiewicz had the pleasure of chairing a panel at the PINT25 conference on contractual practices related to AI training. “I would like to thank the excellent panelists for an interesting discussion: Aleksandra Auleytner, Zbigniew Okoń, Dr. Adam Karpiński, Katarzyna Jasińska, and Karina Kunc-Urbańczyk.” The issue was examined from several perspectives: defining AI training in the context of the exploitation of works, problems related to the TDM exception and the opt-out clause, the organization of AI system training processes and its impact on contracts, contractual practices regarding the use of AI by contractors, and the limitations and risks associated with the terms of use of AI tools. More about the event: https://pint25.oirp.krakow.pl/