Archive for May, 2012

CanLII and Lancaster House Launch Free E-Text on Wrongful Dismissal and Employment Law

CanLII and Lancaster House have launched a free e-text on Wrongful Dismissal and Employment Law. The text is the first openly available text on CanLII with all 23 chapters posted online.

May 7, 2012 — Comments are Disabled — News

Something for Nothing: The Non-Existent Benefit of Linking in the Access Copyright Deal

As debate over the AUCC – Access Copyright settlement spreads to campuses across the country, one of the talking points that has emerged is that the coverage of linking to content in the settlement provides some value to the education community. The model licence defines copy as:

any reproduction, in any material form whatever, including a Digital Copy, that is made by or as a consequence of any of the following activities

(k) posting a link or hyperlink to a Digital Copy.

Critics argue that this provision gives the AUCC no value as there is simply no need to license such activities. The inclusion of the provision means students will be paying something – there must some notional part of the $26 annual fee that covers this section – for nothing. Supporters of the deal, including AUCC, claim otherwise. Indeed, the AUCC FAQ has two questions and answers on point:

May 4, 2012 — 54 comments — News

Provinces Warn Ottawa Over CETA IP Provisions

The B.C., Ontario, and Manitoba governments have reportedly expressed concern about the prospect of higher prescription drug prices as a result of the intellectual property provisions in the Canada – EU Trade Agreement.

May 4, 2012 — 1 comment — News

Stop Being Poor: U.S. Piracy Watch List Hits A New Low With 2012 Report

The U.S. Trade Representative released its annual Special 301 Report yesterday, unsurprisingly including Canada on the Priority Watch list. While inclusion on the list is designed to generate embarrassment in target countries, this year’s report should elicit outrage. Not only is the report lacking in objective analysis, it targets some of the world’s poorest countries with no evidence of legal inadequacies and picks fights with any country that dare adopt a contrary view on intellectual property issues.

The inclusion of Canada on the priority watch list is so lacking in objective analysis as to completely undermine the credibility of the report. The Canadian “analysis” amounts to 173 words that hits on the usual dubious complaints (and given criticism of countries such as Chile for their notice-and-notice system, Israel for their statutory damages rules, and many countries on border enforcement, the Canadian criticism will clearly not end with the enactment of Bill C-11). By comparison, China is treated as equivalent to Canada on the priority watch list, yet garners over 4,600 words.

Earlier this year, I completed a submission with Public Knowledge to the USTR Special 301 process that examined current Canadian law as well as Bill C-11. It concluded:

May 1, 2012 — 21 comments — News