Archive for December 1st, 2015|Daily archive page

Case Comment: Blacklock’s Reporter v. Canadian Vintners Association 2015 CanLII 65885 (ON SCSM) | Centre for Law, Technology and Society | University of Ottawa

The analysis by David Fewer, of U of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), brilliantly summarises the case and its plausible implications. This is a small-claims court case; its jurisprudential reach is limited. But the extraordinary misreading of copyright law, trends, and logic shown by the Court, and the outsize damages the judge awarded to the plaintiff, a newsletter publisher, are a different matter. As Fewer argues,

As of the publication date of this comment, no appeal has been filed. If that remains the case, we will be stuck with this decision on the books. While the Court’s musings on copyright are not binding, the case will nonetheless be used in support of the activities of copyright trolls, in support of expansive claims of infringement on the flimsiest of bases, and in support of expansive liability claims resting on the circumvention of a business model. But while the jurisprudential reach of this case may well prove meagre, its practical effects in motivating trolls may prove more damaging by far.

 

Source: Case Comment: Blacklock’s Reporter v. Canadian Vintners Association 2015 CanLII 65885 (ON SCSM) | Centre for Law, Technology and Society | University of Ottawa

The Google Books decision: what it is and why it is important for libraries | EIFL

From the summary of the webinar:

As well as being a big step forward in fair use law in the US, the Google Books decision gives the green light to library digitization projects for purposes such as access to persons with disabilities, preservation and indexing (noting that conditions of use, such as access to snippets or full text, will differ from case to case).

For libraries in other countries, the Google Books decision means that the snippets of text are viewable globally. While it does not create a legal precedent in countries that do not have fair use in their copyright law, the case does provide a basis for library advocacy to adopt fair use, and the benefit it brings to accessing in-copyright content for education, scholarship and discovery. It may also encourage other countries to undertake national digitization projects.

 

Source: The Google Books decision: what it is and why it is important for libraries | EIFL