FROM THE FEDERAL COURT
(highlight added)
***
(highlight added)
***
Ottawa, July 12, 2017 – A judgment was issued today by the Honourable
Michael L. Phelan of the Federal Court in file T-578-13:
IN
THE MATTER OF THE
CANADIAN COPYRIGHT LICENSING AGENCY ("ACCESS COPYRIGHT") v. YORK
UNIVERSITY
Summary: This was an action
by The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (“Access Copyright”) [Access]
against York University [York] to enforce an Interim Tariff first issued by the
Copyright Board of Canada on December 13, 2010 (as subsequently varied during
its term) in respect to copying activities engaged in by its employees in the
period September 1, 2011, to December 31, 2013. York counterclaimed seeking a
declaration that any such reproductions made fell within the Fair Dealing
Guidelines it issued and therefore constituted the “fair dealing” exception
under s 29 of the Copyright Act [Act]. The declaration sought covered all
reproductions of all copyright-protected works made prior to April 8, 2013, and
thereafter regardless of whether such works were part of Access’s repertoire. In the main action, the issue was “whether the interim
tariff issued by the Copyright Board on December 23, 2010 as amended is
enforceable against York”. In the counterclaim, the issue is: “was York’s
dealings fair for the purposes of s 29 of the Act”? The net effect would be
that if the Interim Tariff was enforceable and hence royalties payable, York
would be exempt because of “fair dealing”.
In the main action, the Court concluded that the Interim Tariff is
mandatory and enforceable against York. It found that to hold otherwise would
be to frustrate the purpose of the tariff scheme of the Act and the broad
powers given to the Copyright Board to make an interim decision pursuant to s
66.51 of the Act. Furthermore, the Interim Tariff arose because of
the objections to the proposed final tariff governing the photocopying at York
and other post-secondary educational institutions. All interested parties had
actual notice of the Interim Tariff by virtue of their participation in the
tariff application process, and the Interim Tariff was never judicially
reviewed.
In the counterclaim, the Court
concluded that Fair Dealing Guidelines [Guidelines] do not withstand the
application of the two-part test laid down by Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence.
York’s dealings with copyrighted material meets part one of the test in that it
falls within the named activities in s 29 – education, research and private
study. However, the Court found that the Guidelines fail an analysis of “fair
dealings” and a consideration of the fairness factors. The declaration requested was therefore denied with costs to the
Plaintiff.
**
The decision is available in English only, as delay of its issuance
would be prejudicial to the public interest. A French language summary of the conclusions
is available. A certified translation will be provided at the earliest
possible time.
A copy of the judgment can be obtained via the Web site of the
Federal Court: http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/fc_cf_en/Index
Oh wow - this is totally the opposite of the way I thought it would go. I thought the SCC was very clear that there was latitude in the fair dealing exemptions that accommodated much if not all of what AC was claiming. This is going to send a major chill in universities and impede access to education, and makes a mockery of fair dealing doctrine. The SCC really should grant leave for this appeal ASAP. A very sad day for user rights, nevermind respect for the basic bargain and theory of copyright in Canada.
ReplyDelete