Companies Can Be Held Liable Even if Servers are Abroad

Supreme Court Rules on Patent Infringement in Online Video Distribution

The Supreme Court of Japan has ruled that companies can be held liable for patent infringement even if their servers are located abroad. This landmark decision was made in a case involving Dwango Co., the operator of the popular video-sharing site Nico Nico Douga, and U.S.-based FC2 Inc., which offers a similar service.

Dwango holds patents related to a feature that displays user comments scrolling over a playing video. The company sued FC2 for patent infringement, arguing that its service violated its patents. FC2 argued that it had not violated Japanese patent rights because its servers were located in the United States.

The Supreme Court, however, ruled in favor of Dwango. The court found that even though FC2's servers were located abroad, its service was intended for Japanese users and that the location of its servers was not a significant factor. The court also considered the potential economic losses to Dwango and concluded that FC2 had infringed on its patents.

This ruling is significant because it clarifies the scope of patent protection in the context of online services. It also highlights the importance of protecting Japanese technology. Dwango welcomed the decision, stating that it is "highly significant" and provides "clear guidance."

The Supreme Court ruled that companies can be held liable for patent infringement even if their servers are located abroad.

The case involved Dwango and FC2, two companies that offer online video-sharing services.

Dwango holds patents related to a feature that displays user comments scrolling over a playing video.

FC2 argued that it had not violated Japanese patent rights because its servers were located in the United States.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Dwango, finding that FC2's service was intended for Japanese users and that the location of its servers was not a significant factor.

The ruling is significant because it clarifies the scope of patent protection in the context of online services.

Dwango welcomed the decision, stating that it is "highly significant" and provides "clear guidance.