In an important decision rendered on June 13, 2014, a Canadian court ordered Google to block a website that was selling goods that violated the trade secrets of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs obtained a default judgment against the defendants. But, the defendants continued to sell the offending goods over the Internet. The plaintiffs, unable to enforce their judgment, asked for Google’s help in blocking the website. Google voluntarily de-indexed specific URL’s requested by the plaintiffs, but this “whac-a-mole” process was ineffective. When Google refused to de-index the offending websites from its search results, the plaintiffs brought a motion against Google for interim relief requiring Google to de-index the websites. Over Google’s objections, in Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Jack 2014 BCSC 1063, Madam Justice Fenlon of the British Columbia Supreme Court granted the injunction.
- Subscribe
-
- Computer and Internet Updates for 2019-04-16 https://t.co/gHzs7F3Div 2019-04-17
- Computer and Internet Updates for 2019-04-16 https://t.co/ZNEfP9FnkF 2019-04-17
- Internet removal firm offers service in Philippines | https://t.co/QbxFLHKYME https://t.co/xFi8tySvz6 2019-04-17
- Is A Fragmented Internet Inevitable? https://t.co/QnTYN2klqo 2019-04-17
- House Passes Bill to Derail ‘Restoring Internet Freedom’ https://t.co/KH7vrit8D2 2019-04-17
- The Online Harms White Paper: its approach to disinformation, and the challenges of regulation https://t.co/Q2JOUv3QQy 2019-04-17
- Ontario's Budget Bill Proposes a Fix to an Unconstitutional Clash between Privacy and Open Courts https://t.co/Wzx8oNnmlw 2019-04-17
- RT @neilturkewitz: Soros: “The platform giants consider themselves the masters of the universe, but in fact they’re slaves to preserving th… 2019-04-17
- Highlighted Posts
- Browsewraps, fair dealing and Blacklock’s Reporter v Canada: a critical commentary
- CASL: the unofficial FAQ, regulatory impact statement, and compliance guideline
- Change and the Copyright Modernization Act
- Contracting for a cloud computing deal?
- Democracy under threat: Parliament must act
- Developments in computer, Internet and e-commerce law: the year in review (2017-2018)
- Fact checking Michael Geist’s criticisms of the FairPlay site blocking proposal
- Google v Equustek: worldwide de-indexing order against Google upheld by Supreme Court
- Hyperlinking and ISP liability clarified by Supreme Court in Crookes case
- Intellectual property education: are Canadian law schools doing enough to support innovation?
- Is Google a publisher according to Google? The Google v Equustek and Duffy cases
- Law and Innovation: Is Intellectual Property a Path to Progress
- Michael Geist: A question of values
- Michael Geist’s attack on artists over Tariff 8
- Michael Geist’s defense of Canada’s indefensible anti-spam law CASL
- Most popular intellectual property and technology law blogs
- OPC position on online reputation: search engines must de-index privacy violating personal information
- PIPEDA’s global extra-territorial jurisdiction: A.T. v. Globe24h.com
- TPP, copyright, e-commerce and digital policy: a reply to Michael Geist
- US court thumbs its nose at Supreme Court of Canada: Google v Equustek
- Why the CRTC should endorse FairPlay’s website-blocking plan: a reply to Michael Geist
- TwitterMy Tweets
- Interesting Links
- 1709 Copyright Blog
- Canadian Privacy Law Blog
- CanLii
- Copyhype
- Copyright Alliance
- Copyright Board
- Copyright See-Saw (Dr. Ficsor)
- eLegal Canton
- Entertainment & Media Law Signal
- Fight Spam (Government of Canada)
- FOSS Patents
- FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT
- Inforrm’s Blog
- Intellectual Property Blog
- Intellectual Property Watch
- Internet cases
- IP Osgoode
- IP Whiteboard
- IPBlog.ca
- IPKat
- Kluwer Copyright Blog
- Music • Technology • Policy
- Patently-O
- Plagiarism Totday
- Rebecca Tushnet’s 43(B)log
- Spicy IP
- Technology & Marketing Law Blog
- The Trichordist
- ABOUT
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio here. - Archives
