The Public Domain blog takes issue with a recent off-hand comment from Bloc MP Thierry St-Cyr, who suggested that there is no copyright in comments made during Question Period debate. The reality is the opposite – the government asserts crown copyright in the House of Commons official record, Hansard.
Bloc MP St-Cyr and Crown Copyright
April 1, 2010
Share this post
2 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 254: Looking Back at the Year in Canadian Digital Law and Policy
byMichael Geist

December 22, 2025
Michael Geist
December 8, 2025
Michael Geist
December 1, 2025
Michael Geist
November 24, 2025
Michael Geist
November 17, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Year in Review: Top Ten Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 254: Looking Back at the Year in Canadian Digital Law and Policy
Confronting Antisemitism in Canada: If Leaders Won’t Call It Out Without Qualifiers, They Can’t Address It
“Shock” and the Bondi Beach Chanukah Massacre
The Catch-22 of Canadian Digital Sovereignty

Actual crown copyright, yes, but
looking at the excerpt from Hansard in the article it appears to me that there is little to no impact to the average citizen… It appears that the crown claims effective copyright (in as much as they restrict what can be done with it) only for “for-profit” uses or for reproductions which claim to be official. What does this mean? It means that you can’t print copies, or sell online, copies of Hansard. There may be a couple others, but…
but what?
Why should there be copyright in such crown works at all?
Many other countries make do without similar provisions. In fact, liberalizing the use, even commercial use, of government produced works, unleashes private-sector activity; witness the multiple third-party publications of the Warren Commission and 9/11 reports in the US.
And, on the flipside, over restrictive government copyright impedes cultural activity and industry; just try clearing rights to crown documents in the UK or Canada.