GRUR Int. issue 7/2017; JIPLP 2017 Issue 9
24 Pages Posted: 13 May 2017 Last revised: 22 Jun 2017
Date Written: May 12, 2017
Very few provisions of the European Union intellectual property enforcement framework are subject to so many preliminary references as orders against intermediaries. The website blocking case law is also an interesting case study from the perspective of the European harmonization. It shows how harmonisation by a halo effect can work. The widely-publicized use of a particular enforcement measure is replicated country-by-country, by a homogeneous group of stakeholders, thereby testing the local implementations and bringing its elements to the public scrutiny. The resulting picture painted by the domestic website blocking cases then reflects the state of Union harmonization.
This piece contributes to the growing scholarship mapping the national post-implementation phase. It proceeds as follows. Part 1 gives a primer on Union law regarding injunctions against intermediaries. Part 2 explores the situation under the Dutch ‘localization’ of Union law, focusing particularly on injunctions, including against intermediaries, right to information and reimbursement of the costs. Part 3 explains the recent Dutch litigation chain concerning the website blocking and puts it in the broader context of discussions. Part 4 contrasts these findings with the situation under European Union law and practice in the other Member States. Part 5 concludes by evaluating the existing state of the harmonization in the area.
Keywords: website blocking, EU, injunctions, intermediaries, liability, innocent third parties
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Husovec, Martin and Van Dongen, Lisa, Website Blocking, Injunctions and Beyond: View on the Harmonization from the Netherlands (May 12, 2017). GRUR Int. issue 7/2017; JIPLP 2017 Issue 9; TILEC Discussion Paper No. 2017-024. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2967318 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2967318