The USTR has posted four volumes of public submissions on its Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement consultation. By contrast, Canada's DFAIT, which conducted a similar consultation this spring, offers only complete silence.
Latest Posts
Canadian Court Awards Major Counterfeiting Damages
The Canadian Trademark Blog points to another court decision awarding huge damages for counterfeiting activities in Canada. Yet another example of how the claims that Canadian law is unable to address counterfeiting concerns do not stand up to any meaningful scrutiny.
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 18: TPMs – No Exception for Personal Uses
One of the most common criticisms of Bill C-61 is its failure to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial uses. It is becoming increasingly clear that many Canadians believe that they should have the right to use their property – whether music, videos or other content – in a fair manner without the law painting them as infringers for personal uses. Unfortunately, Canadian rarely considers personal uses (the private copying levy is an exception). This is not true for all countries. For example, Lithuania (which has acceeded to the WIPO Internet treaties), includes a blanket exception for personal uses. Article 20 provides that:
It shall be permitted for a natural person, without the authorisation of the author or any other owner of copyright, to reproduce, exclusively for his individual use, not for direct or indirect commercial advantage, in a single copy a work published or communicated to the public in any other mode, where the reproduction is a single-action.
While this kind of provision alone would be welcome under Canadian law (and remove much of the complexity found in the new round of consumer-oriented exceptions), it is noteworthy that the Lithuanian anti-circumvention provisions include a specific exception that preserve this personal use right by requiring content owners to enable legitimate uses. Article 75 (1) states:
Bill C-61 Opposition Mounting in Local Ridings
A little over a month has passed since Bill C-61 was introduced by Industry Minister Jim Prentice in the House of Commons. The bill generated considerable negative media attention and a remarkable outpouring of concern from tens of thousands of Canadians. We are now also seeing those concerns played out […]
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 17: TPMs – No Exception for Court Cases, Laws, and Government Documents
In order for the public to know their legal rights and obligations, access to the law is widely viewed as essential. Yet there is real danger that these kinds of materials – court decisions, legal statutes, and other government documents – could end up locked down using digital rights management. Other countries have recognized the danger of mixing digital locks, anti-circumvention legislation, and legal materials. For example, Sweden's implementation of anti-circumvention legislation tries to ensure access court cases and government documents that are subject to TPMs. Article 52f provides that:
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 232: What Will Canadian Digital Policy Look Like Under the New Liberal Carney Government? 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 231: Sara Bannerman on How Canadian Political Parties Maximize Voter Data Collection and Minimize Privacy Safeguards 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 230: Aengus Bridgman on the 2025 Federal Election, Social Media Platforms, and Misinformation 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 229: My Digital Access Day Keynote – Assessing the Canadian Digital Policy Record 
Queen’s University Trustees Reject Divestment Efforts Emphasizing the Importance of Institutional Neutrality
