NORWAY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Camilla Vislie, Magnus Hauge Greaker, Julie Rasmussen Solli and Amalie Hauge Pedersen, Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS
a claim for compensation for the publication of a news article by Bodø Nu, based on the stu - dents’ podcast “ Fengselspodden ” (Eng: “The Prison Podcast”). Two journalism students produced the podcast “ Fengselspodden ” in the autumn of 2022, which included an interview with an inmate referred to as “Mads”. Bodø Nu published an article sum - marising parts of this podcast without prior con - sent, leading to claims of copyright infringement and demands for compensation. The Court of Appeal concluded that Bodø Pub - lishing AS was not liable for copyright infringe - ment or any violation of good business practices between traders. The court first found that Bodø Nu’s article did not infringe on the podcast’s copyright as the use fell within the citation rights under the Norwegian Copyright Act. The court emphasised that the citation was minimal and did not constitute a substantial part of the podcast, noting that the podcast in transcribed form was approximately 10,000 characters, while the article was about 3,800 characters. The court also considered that the article was a legitimate exercise of freedom of expression and fell within the scope of the exception for news reporting. The court high - lighted that the information about “Mads” and his criminal activities was of public interest and that the press had a role in disseminating such information.
The court also underscored the importance of freedom of expression and noted that the press has a crucial role in informing the public. This role includes the right to cite and summarise information from other media sources. The court referenced the principle that citation rights have significant practical and principled importance in journalism. Lastly, the court found no violation of good business practice as outlined in the Norwegian Marketing Control Act. It stated that Bodø Nu’s article was in line with journalistic standards and did not constitute unfair exploitation of the stu - dents’ work. The court emphasised that the use of the podcast content was reasonable and did not deprive the students of the opportunity to commercially exploit their work.
404 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook