Category: c-32

Are Canada’s copyright laws friendly or unfriendly towards wealth destroyers according to Prof. Geist?Are Canada’s copyright laws friendly or unfriendly towards wealth destroyers according to Prof. Geist?



In the last few weeks Prof. Geist has been writing, blogging, tweeting, speaking and even testifying to a Parliamentary Committee about the IsoHunt case and whether there is a need for an amendment to the Copyright Act to create a new cause of action to make online pirate sites and services liable for enabling copyright infringement. His ostensible claim is that representatives of the recording industry secretly filed a copyright infringement claim against IsoHunt three weeks before Bill C-32 was tabled in the House of Commons; kept the suit secret to improve their chances of getting copyright reforms needed to shut the site down – all the while not needing the amendments because they already have the legal tools necessary to put IsoHunt out of business.

iiNet court backs reasonableness of graduated response to stop illegal file sharingiiNet court backs reasonableness of graduated response to stop illegal file sharing



Last week the Australian Full Court released its decision in the landmark case Roadshow Films Pty Limited v iiNet Limited, [2011] FCAFC 23. The Australian appeals court by majority dismissed the appeal from the decision of the primary judge who had held that iiNet, an ISP in Australia that had not acted on any information provided to it by copyright owners, was not liable for authorizing the copyright infringement of its subscribers who had used its facilities to engage in unlicensed peer to peer file sharing.

Canada: online piracy a problem hurting artists, creators and the economyCanada: online piracy a problem hurting artists, creators and the economy



The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) today released a report that spotlighted Internet and physical markets that exemplify key challenges in the global struggle against piracy and counterfeiting. Not surprisingly, Canada-based IsoHunt was identified as a major piracy site which “recently ranked among the top 300 websites in global traffic and among the top 600 in U.S. traffic.”

The report follows on the heels of last week’s submission by the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) to the USTR recommending that Canada be maintained on the Special 301 Priority Watch List in 2011.

Clearing Up the Copyright Confusion (Part II)Clearing Up the Copyright Confusion (Part II)



By Dan Glover

Last week, a dispute arose about the scope of the “fair dealing for the purpose of … education” language proposed in Bill C-32, an Act to Amend the Copyright Act. This dispute was captured in a February 16 blog by John Degen, in which he discussed a running battle with the writer Cory Doctorow about what the Copyright Act currently allows in respect of fair dealing, and what it would allow under the proposed regime. Doctorow’s views are contained here in a responding blog.

C-32 enablement remedy targets secondary copyright infringementC-32 enablement remedy targets secondary copyright infringement



Mark Twain once famously commented, “Only one thing is impossible for God: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet.” Canadian copyright law bears the burden of his axiom more than most. The pith of our copyright law dates from a 1911 bill passed in the United Kingdom, which we adopted wholesale in the early 1920s, and have not kept current with the changes in time.

Our law, which was designed to deal with player pianos and renegade printing presses, and later traditional broadcast techologies like radio and TV, is occasionally called upon to deal with illegal filesharing on the Internet.

En réponse à «Pour démêler la confusion à l’égard du droit d’auteur» (Clearing Up the Copyright Confusion), du Professeur Michael GeistEn réponse à «Pour démêler la confusion à l’égard du droit d’auteur» (Clearing Up the Copyright Confusion), du Professeur Michael Geist



Par Dan Glover,* 9 janvier 2011 (version originale en Anglais)

 Résumé

  • La création d’œuvres protégées par le droit d’auteur pour fins pédagogiques est une entreprise importante et complexe, particulièrement dans un pays aussi vaste, diversifié et peu peuplé comme l’est le Canada. Il faudrait mener une réflexion approfondie avant d’instituer des règles d’utilisation équitable qui menaceraient l’édition pédagogique.
  • L’équité est un concept subjectif qui doit être examiné au cas par cas. Six ans seulement après la décision historique de la Cour suprême dans la cause CCH concernant l’utilisation équitable, la voici saisie à nouveau !

A Response to Professor Michael Geist’s Clearing Up the Copyright ConfusionA Response to Professor Michael Geist’s Clearing Up the Copyright Confusion



Abstract*

·               The creation of copyright works for educational uses is a complex and substantial endeavour, particular in a country as large, diverse and sparsely populated as Canada. Careful thought should be given before adopting fair dealing rules that threaten the health of educational publishing.

·               “Fairness” is an eye-of-the-beholder concept that must be revisited on the facts of every new case. Only six years after the landmark CCH case on “fair dealing”, this issue is returning to the Supreme Court for a second review!

EU highlights role of ISPs, damages and trade agreements in reducing IP infringementsEU highlights role of ISPs, damages and trade agreements in reducing IP infringements



The EU just published a report reviewing the effectiveness of the EU Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights. That Directive, which recognized that effective means of enforcing intellectual property rights are essential for promoting innovation and creativity, harmonized the minimum means available  to right holders and public authorities for fighting infringements of intellectual property rights in the EU. It also established a general framework for exchanging information and administrative co-operation between national authorities and with the Commission.

Liberals announce proposals to amend Bill C-32Liberals announce proposals to amend Bill C-32



The Liberal Party announced today a proposal to amend Bill C-32.

It intends to introduce a new Private Copying Compensation Payment of $35 million to be transferred to Canadian artists each year through the CPCC.

The Liberal Party also announced it intends to amend C-32 in order to:

“Restrict the education exemption by clearly defining “education” and inserting a clear and strict test for “fair” use for education purposes;

Re-insert the right of ephemeral recordings;

Restrict and tighten the language for “mash-ups”;

Remove the arbitrary 1988 statute on public expositions;
Introduce a new resale right on art, similar to European laws;

Ensure the rights of Canadian photographers are comparable to those shared by photographers around the world; and

Address the overly-restrictive digital lock provisions for personal uses.”

An FAQ on TPMs, Copyright and Bill C-32An FAQ on TPMs, Copyright and Bill C-32



This blog post is based on a transcription of the talk I gave last week at the Insight Conference on Rights and Copyright: Bringing Canada into the 21st Century. * I was on a panel with Michael Geist in which we both presented on the topic of “Bill C-32: Legal Protection for TPMs”. The slides I used with my presentation have already been posted here. For convenience they are also at the end of my remarks.

———————————————

Welcome. I hope everyone is having a good day so far.