Posts Tagged ‘fair dealing education’

Did the Supreme Court eviscerate Access Copyright’s business model? A reply to Michael Geist

September 12th, 2012

Michael Geist in a series of recent blog posts claims that the decisions of the Supreme Court in the SOCAN v. Bell Canada, 2012 SCC 36 (SOCAN v Bell) and Alberta (Education) v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright), 2012 SCC 37 (Access Copyright) cases eviscerated Access Copyright’s business model.[1] He asserts that the cases make all copying that would be subject to a license from Access Copyright fair dealings. Moreover, he claims that publishers would not suffer significant economic harm if all copying permitted under Access Copyright licenses or model licenses were fair dealings and no educational institution, whether elementary, secondary, or post-secondary, paid a penny for all such uses.

The Liberal Digital Canada Plan and Copyright

April 11th, 2011

Earlier today, Marc Garneau and guest commentators Michael Geist and Steve Anderson had a live online chat about the Liberal Digital Canada Plan.  A transcription of the chat is available here.

The Liberal Digital Plan says the following about copyright:

Fair balance Between Creators and Consumers.

Digital technology offers many new opportunities, but enjoying content without compensating its creators shouldn’t be among them. At the same time, consumers should have freedom for personal use of digital content they rightfully possess. Liberals have worked to pass effective copyright legislation, including a private copying compensation fund instead of any new tax on consumers.

Educational Tariff Certified by Copyright Board Upheld by Federal Court of Appeal

July 27th, 2010

The Federal Court of Appeal released an important decision on Friday ruling on the subject of fair dealing in the K-12 educational sector. At issue was whether the Copyright Board erred in holding that when teachers copy books and other copyright materials for classroom use such copying is not covered by the fair dealing exception for private study. The Court dismissed the judicial review application holding that the “Board laid out the appropriate test from CCH and, through clear and comprehensible reasons, came to a justifiable conclusion. I see no reviewable error in respect of this issue.”