My weekly Law Bytes column (Ottawa Citizen version, homepage version) covers the Liberals' introduction of C-416, the return of lawful access legislation. I note that while the bill is unlikely to pass – opposition private members bills rarely become law and the current Parliamentary session is likely to end before […]
Columns
C-47 Undermines Olympic Spirit
My weekly Law Bytes column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focuses on Bill C-47, the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act, which I think is better characterized as the Olympic Corporate Sponsor Protection Act. The column synthesizes my comments from two earlier postings on the bill (here and here), namely that […]
Wireless Number Portability Just a First Step
My weekly Law Bytes column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focuses on wireless number portability, which makes its much-anticipated debut on Wednesday, allowing Canadian consumers to change their cellphone provider without surrendering their current phone number. I note that while wireless number portability removes one lock that the providers have […]
Can’t Blame Canada For Counterfeiting
My weekly Law Bytes column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) picks up on last week's posting on the Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network's claims about counterfeiting in Canada. In begins by noting that based on recent media coverage, people unfamiliar with Canada could be forgiven for assuming that all Canadians sport pirate […]
Open Access Reshaping Rules of Research
My weekly Law Bytes column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focuses on the growing global demand for open access, a trend that is forcing researchers, publishers, universities, and funding agencies to reconsider their role in the creation and dissemination of knowledge.
For years, the research model remained relatively static. In Canada, federal funding agencies in the sciences, social sciences, and health sciences doled out hundreds of millions of dollars each year to support research at Canadian universities. University researchers typically published their findings in expensive, peer-reviewed publications, which were purchased by those same publicly-funded universities.
The model certainly proved lucrative for large publishers, yet resulted in the public paying twice for research that it was frequently unable to access. Cancer patients seeking information on new treatments or parents searching for the latest on childhood development issues were often denied access to the research they indirectly fund through their tax dollars.
The emergence of the Internet dramatically changes the equation.