Tell us something we don’t know, Mendelsohn! OK OK, we all know illegal downloading rulez in Canada. But as of now, it seems like the copyright owners are getting serious about fighting online piracy in Canada. Do you think that they won’t come after you if you just downloaded one little TV program? Well, I’ve got a real surprise for you.
You could be seeing this less often now
Did you know that you woke up this morning to a brand new copyright regime in this country? Of course you didn’t, because copyright is boring. Not so! You can now do many things that you were probably doing before anyway, but now are legal! Let’s do a quick rundown of some of things you may find important.
Well hello there. We’ve come to I guess what would be part 3 of my coverage of the pentalogy of Supreme Court cases on copyright. It will most likely be the final post, as the other two cases deal with non-internet stuff (education and movies, yawn) so really, who gives a crap? But Rogers v. SOCAN is chock full of plump internet juiciness, so let’s dive in!
And we’re back with Part Something in our coverage of the Copyright Pentalogy. Last time we took a look at what I called the most “internet-y” of the cases, SOCAN v. Bell. Today let’s take a look at maybe the second most “internet-y” case, Rogers v. SOCAN. Man, I sense a SOCAN trend. HOLD THE PHONE. I just read the case, and decided we’re going to look at ESA v. SOCAN instead. SOCAN trend indeed. Anyway, let me explain the change of heart.
So you may remember back in December I wrote about the five copyright cases that were being heard in the Supreme Court. Well probably you don’t remember. ANYWAY, the decisions in the five cases (the “Copyright Pentalogy”) came down last week. And what do you know, they were all pretty much a big win for consumers, and for common sense. Yay, Supreme Court!
It’s really fucking hot, and I’ve got summertime to enjoy, so I have no desire right now to read all five cases. So I’ll be covering the cases (some of them?) over the next few weeks. If you just can’t wait, and you want to know about all five right now, go read Geist or Sookman. I’m sure they each have a team of students who read the cases for them. Me, I’m just one man. So let’s dig into one of the two most “internet-y” of the cases, SOCAN v. Bell, and see what rights for consumers have been affirmed by our esteemed judges.
So with all the media whoring over the last couple of weeks, I have neglected to tell you all sorts of interesting stuff. You may have heard that Bill C-11 cruised through the Senate and received Royal Assent. Ugh. When it actually comes into force I’ll write about it again. Oh, and here’s a very interesting article about C-11’s effects on isoHunt.com, with juicy quotes from some internet lawyer guy.
But what I missed that I really wanted to write about was a very interesting and important case that came out of the Federal Court of Canada, that is a real help for bloggers and other online journalists. Better late than never. Let’s take a close look at Warman v. Fournier (PDF), which allows for some significant copying of content on the internet. Yippee!
Here’s my latest for The Montreal Gazette’s Legal Matters. Not a bad little piece about ownership of videos you post online, in light of the Pauline Marois ad business from last week. I talked out of my ass a little bit, but hey, that’s what lawyers do.
Posted in: Copyright
Tagged: me me me
Oooh boy! Everyone’s favourite bill, Bill C-11 (The Copyright Modernization Act), passed third reading on Monday night this week in the House of Commons. That means it only has to get
Senate approval rubber-stamped in the Senate, then get Royal Assent (really a rubber stamp) before becoming the law of the land. It should happen within the month most likely. Democracy in action!
The vote was 158-135. I am too lazy to check every name who voted, but I assume that all the yeas were Conservative. Given that there are 164 Conservative MPs, that’s probably a good assumption.
I was all ready to write a nice long post about the good, the bad, and the ugly of C-11 as it relates to the internet, but it is just too fucking hot and humid for a long post. You need (I need) to get to a swimming pool already. Geist has a good piece on how C-11 has evolved over the years, and IP Osgoode has an outstanding summary of what’s in the bill in a nice neutral way, so go read those if you like. I’ll be busy circumventing digital locks (in the name of education and / or criticism!) while I still can.