{"id":131708,"date":"2025-05-12T02:37:23","date_gmt":"2025-05-12T02:37:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/the-doctrine-fr-site-convicted-of-unfair-competition\/"},"modified":"2025-05-12T02:37:25","modified_gmt":"2025-05-12T02:37:25","slug":"the-doctrine-fr-site-convicted-of-unfair-competition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/the-doctrine-fr-site-convicted-of-unfair-competition\/","title":{"rendered":"The doctrine.fr site convicted of &#8220;unfair competition&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><\/p>\n<div id=\"\">\n<p class=\"article__paragraph  \">The judicial guerrillas which has opposed for seven years the historical legal publishers and their doctrine rival illustrates if it is still the importance of data in the economy of platforms. At the heart of this confrontation, a question: how was the young shoot, born in 2016, was able to constitute a stock of 10 million court decisions in two years, when Lexisnexis and the others identified a maximum of 4 million after decades of existence?<\/p>\n<section class=\"catcher catcher--favoris\">\n<div class=\"catcher__content\"><span class=\"catcher__title catcher__title--hide\">Read also |<\/span><span class=\"catcher__desc\">  <span class=\"icon__premium\"><span class=\"sr-only\">Article reserved for our subscribers<\/span><\/span>    Setting of accounts among legal publishers <\/span> <\/div>\n<p> <button class=\"lmd-btn-icon lmd-btn-icon--primary lmd-btn-icon--m js-lmd-dropdown-favorite-toggler\" aria-expanded=\"false\" aria-haspopup=\"true\" aria-controls=\"lmd-dropdown-favorite\" aria-label=\"Lire plus tard\" data-article-id=\"675093\" data-position=\"lire aussi\" data-url=\"https:\/\/www.lemonde.fr\/economie\/article\/2018\/10\/05\/reglement-de-comptes-chez-les-editeurs-juridiques_5365405_3234.html\" data-status=\"\"> <span class=\"icon__favorites\"\/> <span class=\"js-btn-icon-tooltip\" aria-hidden=\"true\">Read later<\/span> <\/button> <\/p>\n<\/section>\n<p class=\"article__paragraph  \">Doctrine which presents itself as the <em>&#8220;Google of law&#8221;<\/em> Affirms that she has established partnerships with certain jurisdictions and was able to be more efficient thanks to technological innovation. Historical actors, themselves, doubt the legality of this supersonic collection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"article__paragraph  \">Wednesday, May 7, the Paris Court of Appeal gave them, in part, reason. She condemned Ferseti, who operates the doctrine.fr site, for <em>&#8220;Unfair competition&#8221;<\/em> concerning <em>&#8220;The collection and treatment of court decisions during the years 2016 to 2019&#8221;<\/em>informing a judgment of the Paris Commercial Court which, in February 2023, had dismissed the five complainants (Editions Dalloz, Lexbase, Lexisnexis, Lextenso and Wolters Kluwer France, which has become Lamy Liaisons).<\/p>\n<p class=\"article__paragraph  \">On the other hand, the Court of Appeal confirmed the judgment of first instance which had dismissed the accusations of parasitism and deceptive commercial practices. Doctrine is inflicted a financial penalty of 370,000 euros, an obligation to display his conviction on his site for 60 days, but retains all of his jurisprudential stock.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"article__sub-title\">&#8220;We are relieved&#8221;<\/h2>\n<p class=\"article__paragraph  \"><em>\u201cWe are relieved. The Court rejected 80 % of the requests of our competitors \u201d<\/em>assures Guillaume Carr\u00e8re, patron of doctrine since June 2020, who minimizes: <em>&#8220;We are sentenced to speeding&#8221;<\/em>. A reference to the law of October 7, 2016 having established the principle of a <em>&#8220;Large dissemination of court decisions&#8221;,<\/em> But whose implementing decree only appeared in June 2020.<\/p>\n<p class=\"reading-mode-only \"><strong>You have 60.8% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\">Tm-En-1<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The judicial guerrillas which has opposed for seven years the historical legal publishers and their doctrine rival illustrates if it is still the importance of data in the economy of platforms. At the heart of this confrontation, a question: how was the young shoot, born in 2016, was able to constitute a stock of 10 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":131709,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3380,890,34172,2622,9984],"class_list":["post-131708","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-competition","tag-convicted","tag-doctrine-fr","tag-site","tag-unfair"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/131708","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=131708"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/131708\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/131709"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=131708"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=131708"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=131708"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}