Canada Introduces Copyright Amendment Bill
29 October 2012
The Canadian Federal Government has introduced a bill to change the country’s Copyright Act in response to demands for reform relating largely to enhanced protection for copyright holders and stronger measures to address online infringement, say lawyers at Baker & McKenzie in Toronto.
“While previous attempts to amend Canada's copyright legislation proved highly controversial and ultimately unsuccessful, many anticipate that Bill C-32 will survive the upcoming review and approval process,” wrote Jim Holloway, Christopher Aide and Rob Kittredge in a client update.
According to the firm, some of the notable changes in Bill C-32 include:
• The creation of a “making available right” by expanding the definition of “communication to the public by telecommunication.” This would clarify that making copyrighted works available online without authority is an infringement of copyright;
• The introduction of a new prohibition on the circumvention of Technical Protection Measures (TPMs) which would trump fair dealing rights and trigger liability even where the TMP circumvention is for a non-infringing purpose;
• The introduction of a prohibition on removal of rights management information from digital files;
• The clarification of the liability of intermediaries such as ISPs and search engines;
• The introduction of a new “notice and notice” regime that would: (a) require ISPs to pass along notice of infringement to their users upon request from rights holders and (b) impose certain data-retention obligations on ISPs;
• The introduction of a new fair dealing exception, relating to parody, satire, backup copying and non commercial user generated content;
• Changes to the treatment of fair dealing use for educational purposes, imposing new obligations on educational institutions; and
• An obligation for the Government to review the Copyright Act every five years.
“In developing Bill C-32, the Government sought to overcome some of the challenges associated with prior proposed amendments through a broad consultative process, involving a range of stakeholders,” the lawyers said. “Still, some of the proposed amendments may nonetheless be seen as too permissive by some and too restrictive by others. As such, some further amendments are possible.”
