CFCN (CTV) reporting of Fair Copyright for Canada rally in Calgary (a discussion)
Here is a blog entry about this clip,
http://kempton.wordpress.com/2007/12/09/fair-copyright-cfcn-report/
I am posting this CFCN news report item (where I have been interviewed) for the purpose of research, criticism, review and news reporting. I believe that, to the best of my knowledge, these rights are available to me under the 2004 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada in CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada.
I also believe that all legal disputes, if there are any, should be governed by the laws of Alberta, Canada since the videos were shot in Calgary, Alberta and the TV channel CFCN is base in Calgary, Alberta.
Ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing#Fair_dealing_in_Canada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCH_Canadian_Ltd._v._Law_Society_of_Upper_Canada
Here are some references (s. 51-53) from "CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada" for reference in case of potential legal dispute as I wish to make it clear the "fair dealing" protection that we currently have available in Canada.
"51 The fair dealing exception under s. 29 is open to those who can show that their dealings with a
copyrighted work were for the purpose of research or private study. "Research" must be given a large
and liberal interpretation in order to ensure that users' rights are not unduly constrained. I agree with the
Court of Appeal that research is not limited to non-commercial or private contexts. The Court of Appeal
correctly noted, at para. 128, that "[r]esearch for the purpose of advising clients, giving opinions, arguing
cases, preparing briefs and factums is nonetheless research." Lawyers carrying on the business of law
for profit are conducting research within the meaning of s. 29 of the Copyright Act.
52 The Copyright Act does not define what will be "fair"; whether something is fair is a question of fact
and depends on the facts of each case. See McKeown, supra, at p. 23-6. Lord Denning explained this
eloquently in Hubbard v. Vosper, [1972] 1 All E.R. 1023 (C.A.), at p. 1027:
It is impossible to define what is `fair dealing'. It must be a question of degree. You must consider
first the number and extent of the quotations and extracts. Are they altogether too many and too long to
be fair? Then you must consider the use made of them. If they are used as a basis for comment,
criticism or review, that may be a fair dealing. If they are used to convey the same information as the
author, for a rival purpose, that may be unfair. Next, you must consider the proportions. To take long
extracts and attach short comments may be unfair. But, short extracts and long comments may be fair.
Other considerations may come to mind also. But, after all is said and done, it must be a matter of
impression. As with fair comment in the law of libel, so with fair dealing in the law of copyright. The
tribunal of fact must decide.
53 At the Court of Appeal, Linden J.A. acknowledged that there was no set test for fairness, but
outlined a series of factors that could be considered to help assess whether a dealing is fair. Drawing on
the decision in Hubbard, supra, as well as the doctrine of fair use in the United States, he proposed that
the following factors be considered in assessing whether a dealing was fair: (1) the purpose of the
dealing; (2) the character of the dealing; (3) the amount of the dealing; (4) alternatives to the dealing; (5)
the nature of the work; and (6) the effect of the dealing on the work. Although these considerations will
not all arise in every case of fair dealing, this list of factors provides a useful analytical framework to
govern determinations of fairness in future cases."
Loading...
4:28Forbidden shifting - A Canadian DMCA?by CIPPICteam6,259 views
Link to this comment:
All Comments (0)