Full bibliography | SCC-Authors-Cited

Trosow, S. E. (2010). Bill C-32 and the Educational Sector: Overcoming Impediments to Fair Dealing. In M. Geist (Ed.), From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright” (p. 541). Irwin Law.

Craig, C. (2010). Locking Out Lawful Users: Fair Dealing and Anti-Circumvention in Bill C‑32. In M. Geist (Ed.), From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright” (p. 177). Irwin Law.

Tawfik, M. J. (2010). History in the Balance: Copyright and Access to Knowledge. In M. Geist (Ed.), From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright” (p. 69). Irwin Law.

Katz, A. (2015). Spectre: Canadian Copyright and the Mandatory Tariff— Part I. Intellectual Property Journal, 28(1), 39. http://hdl.handle.net/1807/100285

Canadian copyright collectives and the Copyright Board have in recent years advanced the theory that when the Board certifies collectives’ tariffs (or fixes the royalties in individual cases), those tariffs become mandatory on users. Users have no choice whether to deal with the collective; they must pay the specified royalties as long as they make a single unauthorized use of a work from the collective’s repertoire. Many users, for some strange reason, have also subscribed to this view, despite its extraordinary consequences. This article, first in a series of two, shows that this spectre of a “mandatory tariff” lacks any basis in law. Established case law debunks it, standard principles of statutory interpretation contradict it and the legislative history discredits it. An approved tariff creates a compulsory licence that interested users can avail themselves of, if they wish to obtain a licence, but it does not force users to become licensees. Copyright collectives can recover unpaid royalties only from users who offered to pay them and later default on their payment.

View on hdl.handle.net

Katz, A. (2015). Spectre: Canadian Copyright and the Mandatory Tariff — Part II. Intellectual Property Journal, 27, 151. http://hdl.handle.net/1807/104733

Canadian copyright collectives and the Copyright Board have in recent years advanced the theory that when the Board certifies collectives' tariffs (or fixes the royalties in individual cases), those tariffs become mandatory on users. Users have no choice whether to deal with the collective; they must pay the specified royalties as long as they make a single unauthorized use of a work from the collective's repertoire. Many users, for some strange reason, have also subscribed to this view, despite its extraordinary consequences. This is a second article in a series of two. The previous article showed that the “mandatory tariff” theory cannot, as a matter of statutory interpretation and in light of the case law, withstand scrutiny. This article shows that in addition, construing the Act in accordance with the “mandatory tariff” theory gives rise to numerous practical challenges, conceptual puzzles, procedural nightmares, and constitutional headaches, each of which should weigh the scales against it. In contrast, the “voluntary licence” theory avoids all these quandaries, and, in addition to being consistent with earlier case law, appears clear, simple, and coherent.

View on hdl.handle.net

Knopf, H. P. (2000). Copyright Collectivity in the Canadian Academic Community: An Alternative to the Status Quo? Intellectual Property Journal, 14(1/3), 109–139.

Macklem, L., & Trosow, S. (2020). Fair Dealing, Online Teaching and Technological Neutrality: Lessons from the COVID-19 Crisis. Intellectual Property Journal, 32(3), 215–247. https://search.proquest.com/openview/6e48cb8e218b32b001639ef4d21337f0/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=46743

View on search.proquest.com

Tawfik, M. J. (2013). The Supreme Court of Canada and the Fair Dealing Trilogy: Elaborating a Doctrine of User Rights under Canadian Copyright Law Case Comment. Alberta Law Review, 51(1), 191–200. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/alblr51&i=201

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

View on heinonline.org

Gervais, D. J. (with Canada Canadian Heritage). (2002). Collective management of copyright and neighbouring rights in Canada: an international perspective. Dept. of Canadian Heritage.

York University v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright) - 2021 SCC 32 (July 30, 2021). https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/18972/index.do

View on decisions.scc-csc.ca

Barbeau, F. (2020). Rétractation du jugement. In JurisClasseur Québec. Procédure civile. I. LexisNexis. (Original work published 2015)

Mayrand, A. (with Mac Aodha, M., & Mayrand, A.). (2007). Dictionnaire de maximes et locutions latines utilisées en droit (4e éd. / mise à jour par Mairtin Mac Aodha). Éditions Yvon Blais.