On Thursday July 12, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered it’s judgements in five major copyright cases. These judgements will shape Canada’s copyright law for many years to come.
For an overview of the decisions, and an initial analysis, please refer to:
For in-depth analysis of each of the major decisions, please see:
1) Entertainment Software Association v. Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, 2012 SCC 34 (July 12, 2012)
- This case concerns the interpretation of the word “communicate” in the “communicate the work to the public by telecommunication” right under s. 3(1)(f) of the Copyright Act. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a download is only a reproduction, and does not constitute a communication subject to a separate right under s. 3(1)(f). For an in-depth analysis, see:
2) Rogers Communications Inc. v. Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, 2012 SCC 35 (July 12, 2012)
- This case concerns the interpretation of the term “to the public” in the “communicate the work to the public by telecommunication” right under s. 3(1)(f) of the Copyright Act. The supreme court ruled that a point-to-point communication (otherwise known as on-demand streaming) of a work is considered “to the public” if the same communication is offered to anyone who wants it. For an in-depth analysis, see:
3) Re:Sound v. Motion Picture Theatre Associations of Canada, 2012 SCC 38 (July 12, 2012)
- This case concerns the interpretation of the term “sound recording” in the context of a song that is synchronized to video. The court ruled that the definition of a sound recording does not include music that is part of a cinematographic work (i.e. a video). For an in-depth analysis, see:
4) Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v. Bell Canada, 2012 SCC 36 (July 12, 2012)
- This case concerns the interpretation of “fair dealing for the purpose of research…” under s. 29 of the of the Copyright Act. The court ruled that short previews of music provided by music stores are considered fair dealing for the purpose of research by a consumer to enable them to determine what they want to purchase. For an in-depth analysis, see:
5) Alberta (Education) v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright), 2012 SCC 37 (July 12, 2012)
- This case concerns the interpretation of “fair dealing for the purpose of… private study…” under s. 29 of the of the Copyright Act. The court ruled that when teachers provide students with photocopies of excerpts from books and textbooks for class, they are facilitating the private study of students, which is considered fair dealing. For an in-depth analysis, see:
IP Osgoode would like to congratulate Professors David Vaver, Giuseppina D’Agostino and Carys Craig, who were all cited in the decisions.