Canadian lawyers have launched a copyright class action lawsuit against Thomson Reuters. The lawsuit stems from the use of legal documents filed in court proceedings in a database marketed by the company.
Lawyers Launch Copyright Class Action Against Thomson Reuters
May 27, 2010
Share this post
3 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 280: A Fall Update on Where Things Stand on Canadian Digital Policy Reforms
byMichael Geist

October 26, 2026
Michael Geist
October 19, 2026
Michael Geist
August 10, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 280: A Fall Update on Where Things Stand on Canadian Digital Policy Reforms
The Wrong Ban: The Heritage Committee Backed a Targeted Ad Ban for Kids and Stopped Short of a Social Media Ban, Yet the Government Chose the Reverse
Regulator First, Rules Later: Bill C-34 Debate Shows the Government Wants a Digital Safety Commission Before It Figures Out What It Will Do
Making the Case Against Its Own Bill: What the Government’s Bill C-34 Charter Statement Reveals About the Constitutional Vulnerability of the Social Media Ban
“Position Has Not Changed”: The Canadian Government Reaffirms That Antisemitism Includes Anti-Zionism

And yet, their CCH victory allowing them to copy other people’s material without permission and payment would seem to argue against them on this!
Copyright on court records?
Perhaps something should be done to prevent a private company from profiting from court records, but suing for copyright infringement puts the transparency and accessiblity of the judicial system in jeopardy. Scan and post all court documents on the web. Problem solved.
@Democrat
To a point I agree with you. I would argue, however, that court documents related to anything other than the charges themselves should not be publicly available until after the trial. The reason is to try to ensure jury neutrality. Posting prior to trial could lead to making it more difficult to get a jury.
@Bob: agreed. However, if the publishers of the books in the Law Society library get permission from the legal firms in the first place prior to publishing the references, then arguably the CCH decision doesn’t apply.