Together with my colleague Jeremy deBeer, I recently contributed an essay titled Developing Canada’s Intellectual Property Agenda to the annual Canada Among Nations (2007). Our article, which is available online in PDF or via SSRN, argues that Canada should lead by example on intellectual property by adopting flexible, balanced policies […]

Fair Dealing by Giulia Forsythe (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/dRkXwP
Copyright
Comcast Proposes File Sharing ‘Bill of Rights’
The FCC's interest in net neutrality continues to have an impact as Comcast is has proposed a file sharing bill of rights, though consumer interests are not part of the discussion.
National Gallery Looking For Profits in the Wrong Place
My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, Ottawa Citizen version, Vancouver Sun version, homepage version) explores the issue of museums and fees associated with public domain works. As museums experiment with the Internet – many are using online video, social networks, and interactive multimedia to create next-generation museums that pull content from diverse places to create "virtual museums" – the museum community has emerged as a leading voice for the development of legal frameworks that provide sufficient flexibility to facilitate digitization and avoid restrictions that could hamper cultural innovation.
Yet as museums embrace the Internet's potential, there is concern that their advocacy and actions are not always consistent. This is particularly true with respect to their policies on public domain works, for which the term of copyright has expired. The public domain issue has emerged as a contentious one within the museum community. Many museums receive regular requests for copies of works in their collection to be reproduced in school texts, magazines, or other publications. The costs associated with these requests vary widely. Some museums levy administrative fees (for the cost associated with handling the request), reproduction fees (for the cost of reproducing the image), and notwithstanding the expiry of copyright, permission fees.
In 2006, London's famed Victoria and Albert Museum became the first museum to completely drop charges for the reproduction of images in scholarly books and magazines. While that decision generated considerable acclaim, according to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, the National Gallery of Canada (NGC) appears to be taking the opposite approach by treating public domain works as a profit centre.
National Gallery Looking For Profits in the Wrong Place
Appeared in the Toronto Star on April 15, 2008 as Museums Should End Fees for Public Domain Appeared in the Ottawa Citizen on April 15, 2008 as National Gallery Looking for Profits in all the Wrong Places Appeared in the Vancouver Sun on April 15, 2008 as Gallery Looking for […]
New Zealand’s Digital Copyright Law Demonstrates Anti-Circumvention Flexibility
New Zealand passed its digital copyright law this week, drawing the ire of the technology community and the blogosphere. While the bill isn't great, many of the provisions are far better than what Industry Minister Jim Prentice may have in mind for Canada including format and time shifting provisions as well as anti-circumvention provisions that are more flexible than those found in the DMCA. In fact, the anti-circumvention provisions are arguably the best of any country, since they are compliant with WIPO, limited in scope, and seek to preserve fair dealing rights.
On the anti-circumvention front, there are several things to note:
- the technological protection measures (TPMs) expressly exclude access controls such as region coding. In other words, the anti-circumvention provisions do not apply to devices that "only controls access to a work for non-infringing purposes."
- the legislation targets anti-circumvention devices, but excludes those devices that have something more than "limited commercially significant applications" other than circumventing a TPM.
- the law prohibits making, selling, distributing, advertising, or offering a circumvention device if the person "knows or has reason to believe that it will, or is likely to, be used to infringe copyright." The inclusion of a knowledge requirement creates an additional safeguard against overbroad application of the provision.
- most importantly, the law clearly permits circumvention for "permitted acts", which effectively preserves fair dealing rights (the statute also specifies the right to circumvent for encryption research). More impressive, the law includes a system to facilitate circumvention for permitted acts in the event that users are unable to circumvent a TPM themselves. In such cases, the law allows a "qualified person", which includes librarians, archivists, and educational institutions, to circumvent a TPM on behalf of a user (the user can also ask the copyright owner to unlock the work for them).