Last Thursday the Government of Canada introduced into the House of Commons Bill C-11, an Act to Amend the Copyright Act. In a press release describing the Bill, Heritage Minister James Moore and Industry Minister Christian Paradis, stated that the Bill will ensure that Canada’s copyright laws “are modern, flexible, and in line with current international standards” and will “protect and help create jobs, promote innovation, and attract new investment to Canada.”
Archive for the ‘wppt’ category
Some observations on Bill C-11: The Copyright Modernization Act
October 3rd, 2011Rethinking FISA
May 25th, 2011SPAM is awful. It wastes our time. It clogs the Internet. It is full of scams, malware and fraudulent, false and misleading messages. Who wouldn’t cheer when Canada finally decided late in 2010 to outlaw SPAM and related afflictions of malware, spyware, address harvesting and sending false and misleading commercial electronic messages?
Indeed, there was much satisfaction when Canada’s anti-SPAM law, also known as FISA[2], was given royal assent on December 15, 2011. After a lengthy and thorough review process, including consultations and Parliamentary reviews, Canadians could look forward to the toughest anti-SPAM law in the world just as soon as the regulations were finalized, which is expected this summer.
Key issues on the legal protection for TPMs under Bill C-32
December 8th, 2010There has been considerable debate about the appropriate scope for legal protection of TPMs under Bill C-32. I dealt with this issue in a speech I gave today at the Insight Conference: RIGHTS and COPYRIGHT, Bringing Canada into the 21st Century.
The questions I discussed were the following:
- Does Bill C-32 properly implement the WIPO Treaties consistent with approaches used by Canada’s trading partners?
- Does Bill C-32 permit circumvention of TPMs to permit copying for fair dealing, educational and other purposes?
- Does Bill C-32 have a flexible framework to permit new exceptions to be made by regulation?
My C-32 opening remarks
December 1st, 2010The following were my opening remarks to the Parliamentary Committee studying Bill C-32 made earlier today.
I would like to thank the committee for inviting me to appear today to provide input on Bill C-32.
Before starting my remarks, I would like to give you some background about myself. I am not telling you all of these things to boast, but because I understand some have expressed concern that I have one or two clients affected by this legislation and that is the only view shaping my perspective. This is not the case. I am lawyer who specializes in this area and have worked and taught about it for many years.
Separating copyright fiction from facts about C-32’s TPM provisions
November 24th, 2010Earlier this week Prof. Geist wrote an opinion piece in the Toronto Star in which he purported to separate “copyright facts from fiction”. His opinion piece, Separating copyright facts from fiction, followed by another blog post this week, The False Link Between Locks and Levies, are two in a series of blog posts and opinion pieces written by him recently that purport to expose as inaccurate statements made about Bill C-32 by various individuals and organizations. See: Responding to ACTRA: Group Calls C-32 a “Disaster” and Proposes Six Part Fix; Copyright Fear Mongering Hits a New High: Writers Groups Post Their C-32 Brief; In Search of A Compromise on Copyright; EU: ACTA Digital Lock Rules Don’t Cover Access Controls.
Copyright Office Exempts Six Classes of Works from DMCA’s Access Control Anti-circumvention Prohibitions
July 27th, 2010Yesterday, the Librarian of Congress announced the classes of works subject to an exemption from the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works.
Accompanying ruling was the Statement of the Librarian of Congress on the Anticircumvention Rulemaking, the Recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, and the Determination of the Librarian of Congress and Text of the Regulation (to be published in Federal Register).
ACTA and TPMs
July 20th, 2010The latest draft of the ACTA is publically available. It has undergone significant development since the last publically available version including to one of its most important chapters, the chapter on Special Measures Related to Technological Enforcement of Intellectual Property in the Digital Environment. This is the chapter that includes the obligation of the contracting parties to provide legal protection for TPMs. Despite the changes made to these provisions, it is clear that the countries negotiating the treaty still intend that the contracting parties provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against circumvention related activities that could undermine new and exciting business models that rely on TPMs.
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio 