1. The Two Weeks That Changed Canadian Copyright michael geist canada research chair in internet and e-commerce law university of ottawa

2. Years

3. 14 Days

4. Canada = most copyright user rights friendly country in the world

5. June 29 th – July 12 th, 2012

6. June 29 th Bill C-11 Receives Royal Assent

7. July 12th SCC Releases Copyright Pentalogy

8. July 4 th European Parliament Rejects ACTA

9. What happened?

10. How did it happen?

11. June 29 th, 2012

15. Issue2005 (C-60) Fair DealingNo Consumer Exceptions (time shifting, format shifting, backup copies) No Internet Exceptions (Internet content, user generated content exception) No Statutory Damages ReformNo Digital LocksYes Internet Service Provider Safe Harbour Yes

24. books

31. Issue2005 (C- 60) 2008 (C-61) Fair DealingNo Consumer Exceptions (time shifting, format shifting, backup copies) No Internet Exceptions (Internet content, user generated content exception) No Statutory Damages ReformNoMinor Digital LocksYes Internet Service Provider Safe Harbour Yes

43. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03IhHeZwJuM

46. Issue2005 (C-60) 2008 (C-61) 2010 (C-32) Fair DealingNo Yes Consumer Exceptions (time shifting, format shifting, backup copies) No Yes Internet Exceptions (Internet content, user generated content exception) No Yes Statutory Damages ReformNoMinorYes Digital LocksYes Internet Service Provider Safe Harbour Yes

47. July 4, 2012

51. July 12, 2012

53. 1990

54. Bishop v. Stevens This distinction between the right to perform and the right to record a work is unsurprising in light of the object and purpose of the Act. As noted by Maugham J., in Performing Right Society, Ltd. v. Hammond's Bradford Brewery Co., [1934] 1 Ch. 121, at p. 127, "the Copyright Act, 1911, was passed with a single object, namely, the benefit of authors of all kinds, whether the works were literary, dramatic or musical".

55. 2002

56. Theberge “Excessive control by holders of copyrights and other forms of intellectual property may unduly limit the ability of the public domain to incorporate and embellish creative innovation in the long-term interests of society as a whole, or create practical obstacles to proper utilization.”

57. 2004

58. CCH “the fair dealing exception is perhaps more properly understood as an integral part of the Copyright Act than simply a defence. Any act falling within the fair dealing exception will not be an infringement of copyright. The fair dealing exception, like other exceptions in the Copyright Act, is a user’s right. In order to maintain the proper balance between the rights of a copyright owner and users’ interests, it must not be interpreted restrictively.”

59. 2012

61. ESAC v. SOCAN “The principle of technological neutrality requires that, absent evidence of Parliamentary intent to the contrary, we interpret the Copyright Act in a way that avoids imposing an additional layer of protections and fees based solely on the method of delivery of the work to the end user. To do otherwise would effectively impose a gratuitous cost for the use of more efficient, Internet-based technologies.”

62. SOCAN v. Bell “Limiting research to creative purposes would also run counter to the ordinary meaning of "research", which can include many activities that do not demand the establishment of new facts or conclusions. It can be piecemeal, informal, exploratory, or confirmatory. It can in fact be undertaken for no purpose except personal interest. It is true that research can be for the purpose of reaching new conclusions, but this should be seen as only one, not the primary component of the definitional framework..”

63. Alberta v. Access Copyright “…they study what they are told to study, and the teacher's purpose in providing copies is to enable the students to have the material they need for the purpose of studying. The teacher/copier therefore shares a symbiotic purpose with the student/user who is engaging in research or private study. Instruction and research/private study are, in the school context, tautological.”

64. Doesn’t End There…

67. Canadian Copyright 2013

68. Fair dealing as a users right

69. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes

70. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice

71. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception

72. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages

73. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials

74. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality

75. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies

76. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies Expansive approach to research & education

77. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies Expansive approach to research & education Rejection of criminalization of copyright

78. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies Expansive approach to research & education Rejection of criminalization of copyright Copyright term

79. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies Expansive approach to research & education Rejection of criminalization of copyright Copyright term Digital library loans

80. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies Expansive approach to research & education Rejection of criminalization of copyright Copyright term Digital library loans Privacy

81. Canadian Copyright 2013 Fair dealing as a users right Expanded fair dealing purposes Notice-and-notice User Generated Content Exception Cap on non-commercial statutory damages Internet exception for publicly available materials Technological neutrality Shifting – format shifting, time shifting, backup copies Expansive approach to research & education Rejection of criminalization of copyright Copyright term Digital library loans Privacy Crown copyright licence

82. Why it happened?

83. Politics

84. Trade Pressure

85. Personalities

86. McLachlin & Abella

87. Clement & Moore

88. Bulte & Angus

89. Public

90. Social Media

91. Copyright Scholars

92. Concerned Canadians

93. 90,000

94. 8,000

95. 2

96. @mgeist