Canadian Supreme Court Supports Balance In Copyright Issues

from the balancing-users'-rights-vs-owners'-rights dept

Up in Canada, the Supreme Court has come out with a ruling saying that a legal society did not violate copyright laws by photocopying materials for lawyers, because those materials were being used for "research, review, private study or criticism." In other words, they were looking at copyrights not just as the owners' right - but as determining a balance between the creators' rights and the users' rights. As this analysis points out, this could have far reaching implications for intellectual property law in Canada, as it's a very different way of looking at the issue. However, on the negative side, it appears the judgment also ruled that people could copyright compilations of facts. Here in the US, of course, this is currently illegal, but may soon change as a result of a bill making its way through Congress.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2004 @ 7:25am

    Yes, you can copyright facts ... sort of

    As the article said "The legal test is whether "skill and judgment" were needed to put together the collection. " If you are just talking about straight facts, then "no" that can't be copyrighted. If you are talking about a collection of facts that required judgement (i.e. selecting specific news events for publication as in the vein of the Darwin books) then yes. The facts themselves cannot be copyrighted, but the compilation or organization of them can be.

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.