<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Polish IP &#38; IT law - copyright trademark computer internet telecomm &#187; case law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/review/case-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rychlicki.net/en</link>
	<description>Tomasz Rychlicki Intellectual Property Law Internet Law IT Law Computer Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 16:38:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Telecommunications law, case I OSK 1079/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/08/03/4860/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/08/03/4860/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 15:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 159 TLA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 160 TLA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 161 TLA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 5 PPD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 6 PPD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 61 §3 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[image]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISP liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal regulations on computer networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal rights or interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Protection of Personal Data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Telecommunications Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is the continuation of a story described in &#8220;Personal data protection, case II SA/Wa 1598/09&#8220;. The Supreme Administrative Court in its order of 15 July 2010 case file I OSK 1079/10 decided to stay the execution of the decision issued by the Inspector General for Personal Data Protection (GIODO) and ruled that the Polish [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/08/03/4860/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case Sp. 334/05</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/30/378/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/30/378/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[absolute grounds for refusal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 131(2)(i) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 8(1) TMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad faith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Patent Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark invalidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=378</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1 March 2004, the Polish Patent Office registered word-figurative trade mark CZUWAJ R-152214 (in English: &#8220;Be Prepared&#8221;). Związek Harcerstwa Polskiego &#8211; Główna Kwatera is the owner. The sign looks exactly the same as the Scouts Cross. The final design of Scout&#8217;s Crass was approved during ZHP&#8217;s unification conference held on October 1-2 1918 which [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/30/378/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Personal interest, case VI ACa 1402/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/16/4615/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/16/4615/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:26:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 23 CC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 24 CC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-law issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[image]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal rights or interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Appeallate Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Civil Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quotation right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4615</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Appellate Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 15 July 2010 case file VI ACa 1402/09 held that even if a website only republishes articles or summaries of works published in major periodicals, it is not absolved from responsibility for infrigement of personal interests of a person who was described in such an article.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/16/4615/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industrial design and trade mark law, case II GSK 481/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/14/4086/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/14/4086/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:05:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 117 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Directive 98/71/EC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[invalidation of a right in registration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[novelty of an industrial design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal rights or interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark infringement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4086</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is the continuation of the history described in &#8220;Industrial design and trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 710/08&#8220;. Rosinski Andrzej Rosinski Michal Rosinska Joanna Zaklad Produkcji Opakowan Rosinski i S-ka, Sp. J. decided to file a cassation complaint to the Supreme Administrative Court, hoping the Court would clarify the interpretation of article 117(2) of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/14/4086/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Personal interest, case VI Aca 1460/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/12/4373/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/12/4373/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:10:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[advertising law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 23 CC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 24 CC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal rights or interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Appeallate Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Civil Code]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4373</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Małgorzata F. sued a residential community and the advertising company for infringement of her personal interest that according to Małgorzata F. occured by placing on the building in which she lives a big banner advertising, which concealed all windows of her apartment. The plaintiff did not ask for financial compensation but only for the apology [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/12/4373/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

