News

Rzeczpospolita published an article by editor Jan Skoumal, which included a commentary by Dr. Michal Markiewicz on legislative changes to the permitted use for machine learning of generative artificial intelligence (TDM) models. It is a good thing that the ministry has backed off from the proposed TDM modifications, which are contrary to EU law, as otherwise we would limit Poland’s competitiveness, including research opportunities, and the change itself would not affect the activities of major players in the AI market, who could develop their models outside Poland anyway and then offer them to end users in our country. Link to article: https://www.rp.pl/internet-i-prawo-autorskie/art40003381-nowelizacja-prawa-autorskiego-sztuczna-inteligencja-wraca-do-lask

Recently, visits to the CJEU have become our tradition. This time Marcin Mioduszewski and Zuzanna Ochońska-Borowska had the honor of appearing before the Court in a preliminary question proceeding. In an unfair competition appeal case pending before a national court, in which we are representing our client, doubts have arisen about the correctness of the composition of the court of first instance. The Court of Justice of the EU will now answer questions regarding violations of the rules on random allocation of judges to cases, in the context of EU law. We look forward to the judgment, which will have a not inconsiderable impact on the practice and understanding of another aspect of the independence and impartiality of judges in the EU. Advocate General L. Medina’s opinion is scheduled for June 2024.

Today, the Polish Press Agency website published a statement by Dr. Michał Markiewicz on the currently hot topic of royalties on the online streaming exploitation of certain works. First of all, he points out what the mechanism of additional remuneration, about which there is a dispute, is and how this system would work if applied to the automotive industry. Why should only creators of audiovisual works and performers of musical and spoken-word works be entitled to double remuneration for streaming? How does this amendment relate to the DSM Directive, which it supposedly implements? How could the proportional and appropriate remuneration of creators, including audiovisual works, be regulated differently? Thanks for the invitation and the interview to editor Anna Kruszyńska. Link to the full article: https://www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/co-z-pieniedzmi-dla-tworcow-za-wykorzystywanie-utworow-w-internecie-i-streamingu-glos?fbclid=IwAR1nQLXtwdd1

Jaroslaw Sroczynski has been recommended again in the Competition/Antitrust field within the international ranking organized by Chambers. To quote from the organizers: “Jarosław Sroczyński of Markiewicz & Sroczyński is a notable senior name in competition law matters. He assists with a broad range of issues, including antitrust and regulatory compliance.” Congratulations to all the awardees! Link to ranking: https://chambers.com/lawyer/jaroslaw-sroczynski-europe-7:324688

IIn today’s Rzeczpospolita, Dr. Michal Markiewicz writes about trademarks. It is worth remembering that in addition to the prerequisites for individual forms of infringement, an encroachment on the protective right must consist of a violation of general prerequisites, including the key ones from the perspective of determining the scope of the right itself, use of the sign in business dealings, use in relation to goods and services, violation of the function of the trademark, and illegality. So what is the use of a sign as a trademark? And how to understand the necessity of infringing the function of a trademark? The evolution of case law on the one hand makes this branch of law more flexible, but on the other hand introduces significant uncertainty about the very scope of the law. Publicly available excerpt from the article: https://archiwum.rp.pl/artykul/1511222-Jak-uzywac-znak-towarowy.html?fbclid=IwAR0vxU3o2mOju9Xq1hi32pOKg4uF9PxxwL68YBe5yTEn3x8kJs-xS5IpAec

Case C-255/22: yesterday, the European Court of Justice closed the appeal hearing in re: Gazprom committments (Commission’s decision of 2018, AT.39816). Now the AG Rantos’ opinion in June, and then the verdict. What it will be? As you can see in the photos, the stairways to justice are long, but lead high. Cordial thanks to Silvio Cappellari, Sebastian Gröss and Niklas Jacobi for the opportunity to cooperate in this matter. Special thanks to Ralica Yordanova, supporting all of us on behalf of the client, Bulgarian natural gas company Overgas Inc.

This time in Rzeczpospolita, Dr. Michal Markiewicz presents the issue of cumulation of IP protection from the perspective of a single product, the protection of which entrepreneurs can expand by obtaining multiple rights whose “direction” of protection differs. Thus, we can, among other things, protect specific details of a design or the overall impression it creates, protect against the risk of association by the average viewer, or the use of a new technical achievement. In the text, Dr. Markiewicz writes why it is worthwhile to seek additional protection of an important project for the entrepreneur. He also points out the systemic dangers of failing to standardize exceptions and limitations to exclusive rights – an example of which is the recent and widely commented ruling of the Court of Justice of the EU in the Audi C-344/22 case. Publicly available excerpt from the article: https://archiwum.rp.pl/artykul/1510455-Dlaczego-warto-chronic-wieloma-prawami-ten-sam-projekt.html