The Supreme Court of Canada heard five copyright cases over dense two-day hearings on Dec. 6-7.  One of the cases involved the application of the concept of fair dealing with copyrighted works in education.  At the heart of this appeal was a key distinction made by Copyright Board between copies of works made by students or at their initiative, which could be fair dealing, and copies made by a teacher for students with instructions to read them, which could not.  The distinction is summarized in para. 118 of the Board’s decision: a copy made by a teacher with instructions to …

Fair Dealing, Copyright, and the Haggadah Read more »

UPDATE: The Court granted CILP’s motion for leave to intervene (as well as all other motions). Last Tuesday the Centre for Innovation Law and Policy (CILP) filed a motion for leave to intervene in the K-12 fair dealing case before the Supreme Court of Canada.  The motion was filed after the deadline of September 12, 2011, along with a request for an extension of time to do so, mainly on the basis that CILP had assumed that the proposed academic interveners, particularly the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC), would adequately represent the interests of the university community …

CILP applies for Leave to Intervene in the K-12 Fair Dealing Case Read more »

Paul-Erik Veel and I have (finally) posted our new paper on SSRN.  The paper, downloadable here, is called “Beyond Refusal to Deal: A Cross-Atlantic View of Copyright, Competition and Innovation Policies”.  Here’s the abstract: Conventional wisdom holds that the European Union, through the application of its competition law, has opted to subordinate intellectual property rights in the pursuit of competitive markets to a much greater extent than has the United States. We argue that, at least in the context of copyright protection, this conventional wisdom is false. While European antitrust regulation of IPRs does presently seem much more robust and activist …

New paper: Beyond Refusal to Deal: A Cross-Atlantic View of Copyright, Competition and Innovation Policies Read more »

On Tuesday, I submitted my Reply to Access Copyright’s (AC) submission regarding the AUCC Application to compel AC to grant transactional licenses.  In my previous submission I pointed out that while the AUCC correctly diagnosed some of the problems, it asked to Board to prescribe the wrong remedy.  I also explained why the conduct that the AUCC complained about might run afoul the Competition Act.   AC responded on July 8.  Basically, AC’s response boiled down to four themes: “I didn’t do it”: flatly denying any wrongdoing without providing any evidence or theory to refute the evidence-based allegations made against it; …

My Reply to Access Copyright’s Submission about Transactional Licenses Read more »