Five days later, in Google, the Court described the “borderless’ nature of the internet,”(¶ 41) and upheld a world-wide injunction (not just for google.ca pages, as Google requested) prohibiting Google from displaying entire domains and websites that sold products allegedly infringing intellectual property rights. In a 5-2 decision, the Court held the worldwide injunction was the only way to effectively mitigate the harm to Equustek pending trial and caused minimal harm to Google.
Canadian plaintiffs and regulators may use these cases to try to strike or modify forum selection clauses, and possibly other clauses in online terms or “click-wrap” agreements, such as liability caps, waivers and disclaimers. Organizations may want to consider additional strategies to reduce risk.
UPDATE: As of July 24, 2017, Google has sought relief in the U.S. District Court for the N.D. California, alleging that this ruling violates U.S. law and thus the company does not need to comply with the Canadian decision.
If you have any questions, please call or email your existing contact at GTC Law Group or email email@example.com.
Prepared by Laila Paszti under the supervision of GTC Member Sayoko Blodgett-Ford (CIPP/US). Laila is admitted to practice in New York and Ontario (Canada). Sayoko is admitted to practice in Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, Hawaii and the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. This Update discusses certain legal and related developments and should not be relied upon as legal advice, or as legal guidance for particular circumstances. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone.