Fair Dealing by Giulia Forsythe (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/dRkXwP

Copyright

Access Copyright’s Desperate Declaration of War Against Fair Dealing

Months after the Supreme Court of Canada delivered a stinging defeat to Access Copyright by ruling for an expansive approach to fair dealing and the government passed copyright reforms that further expanded the scope of fair dealing, the copyright collective responded yesterday with what amounts to a desperate declaration of war against fair dealing. In the aftermath of the court decisions and legislative reforms, a consensus emerged within the Canadian education community on the scope of fair dealing. The fair dealing policies used guidance from the Supreme Court to establish clear limits on copying and eliminate claims that the law was now a free-for-all. In developing those fair dealing policies, however, many institutions no longer saw much value in the Access Copyright licence.

Access Copyright has decided to fight the law – along with governments, educational institutions, teachers, librarians, and taxpayers – on several fronts. It has filed for an interim tariff with the Copyright Board in an effort to stop K-12 schools from opting out of its licence and it has filed a proposed post-secondary tariff that would run well after most Canadian schools will have opted out of its licence. Most notably, it has filed a lawsuit against York University over its fair dealing guidelines, which are similar to those adopted by educational institutions across the country. While the lawsuit has yet to be posted online [Update: Statement of Claim posted here], the Access Copyright release suggests that the suit is not alleging specific instances of infringement, but rather takes issue with guidelines it says are “arbitrary and unsupported” and that “authorize and encourage copying that is not supported by the law.”

Most of Access Copyright’s longstanding arguments were dismissed by the Supreme Court this past summer.

April 9, 2013 — 11 comments — News

European Commission Study Finds Online Music Piracy Doesn’t Hurt Sales

The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre has released a report that finds that online music piracy does not harm sales. The report examined the browsing habits of more than 16,000 European consumers. It found that an increase in clicks on infringing sites led to a small increase in clicks on […]

March 18, 2013 — 2 comments — News

What’s Really Behind Canada’s Anti-Counterfeiting Bill?

With only limited fanfare, earlier this month Industry Minister Christian Paradis introduced Bill C-56, the Combating Counterfeit Products Act. Since no one supports counterfeit products – there are legitimate concerns associated with health and safety – measures designed to address the issue would presumably enjoy public and all-party support. Yet within days of its introduction, the bill was the target of attacks from both opposition parties and the public.

The NDP raised the issue during Question Period in the House of Commons, accusing the government of trying to implement the widely discredited Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) “through the backdoor.” The public also picked up on the issue, noting that the bill appears to be less about protecting Canadians and more about caving to U.S. pressure (the U.S. called on Canada to implement ACTA on the same day the bill was tabled).

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes the concerns associated with the bill fall into two main categories: substance and ACTA implementation. The substantive concerns start with the decision to grant customs officials broad new powers without court oversight. Under the bill, customs officials are required to assess whether goods entering or exiting the country infringe any copyright or trademark rights.

March 13, 2013 — 11 comments — Columns

What’s Really Behind Canada’s Anti-Counterfeiting Bill

Appeared in the Toronto Star on March 9, 2013 as What’s Really Behind Ottawa’s Anti-Counterfeiting Bill? With only limited fanfare, earlier this month Industry Minister Christian Paradis introduced Bill C-56, the Combating Counterfeit Products Act. Since no one supports counterfeit products – there are legitimate concerns associated with health and […]

March 13, 2013 — Comments are Disabled — Columns Archive

Canipre Admits It’s Behind Voltage-TekSavvy File Sharing Lawsuits With Speculative Invoicing Scheme

Canipre, a Montreal-based intellectual property rights enforcement firm, has admitted that it is behind the Voltage file sharing lawsuits involving TekSavvy in what is described as a “speculative invoicing” scheme. Often referred to as copyright trolling, speculative invoicing involves sending hundreds or thousands of demand letters alleging copyright infringement and seeking thousands of dollars in compensation. Those cases rarely – if ever – go to court as the intent is simply to scare enough people into settling in order to generate a profit.

Canadian Business reports that Canipre’s goal is to import the speculative invoicing strategy to Canada and that it found a willing partner in Voltage Pictures. Canipre collected thousands of IP addresses that are alleged to have downloaded Voltage films and Voltage is now asking the Federal Court to order TekSavvy to disclose the subscriber names linked to the IP addresses.

The Canipre admission is important because it is consistent with arguments that the case involves copyright trolling and that the Federal Court should not support the scheme by ordering the disclosure of subscriber contact information.

March 12, 2013 — 29 comments — News