through translate.google.com and learned to my horror that the defendant in this case was Wikimedia, not some map/app designer.
I could not tell who the plaintiff was, it translates as "Plaintiffs in the district court Image Copyright in Sweden oak. for., 769610-3121 Hornsgatan 103 117 28 Stockholm" I looked at that address on google maps and discovered that it is hard to find the front door of a building in Stockholm.
BUS (http://bus.se/en ). It's a copyright collecting society. That is, if you own the copyright in a visual work, you can assign it to BUS and they will sell the publication rights for you (and take a 20% commission). They also manage some compulsory copyright licence schemes. This is a standard way of managing royalty fees in Europe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_collective ).
I was curious "who is the plaintiff here" because I didn't see that in the discussion anyplace, so I ran vilhelm_s's helpful link to the decision http://www.hogstadomstolen.se/Domstolar/hogstadomstolen/Avgo...
through translate.google.com and learned to my horror that the defendant in this case was Wikimedia, not some map/app designer.
I could not tell who the plaintiff was, it translates as "Plaintiffs in the district court Image Copyright in Sweden oak. for., 769610-3121 Hornsgatan 103 117 28 Stockholm" I looked at that address on google maps and discovered that it is hard to find the front door of a building in Stockholm.