Comments on: Canadian fed court: linking isn't copyright infringement, neither is excerpting an article

By: stovedoor

stovedoor — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:43:00 +0000

I was hoping ‘canadian-fed court’ was along the same lines as ‘grain-fed beef’. Alas, the truth was not so interesting.

By: Paul Gillett

Paul Gillett — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:02:00 +0000

Hey, what’s the deal? You didn’t post a link to Geist’s original article?

By: Ipo

Ipo — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:45:00 +0000

And the terms “fair use” and “fair dealing” can be used interchangeably.
That’s where I got on the wrong railroad switch.

By: Ipo

Ipo — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:39:00 +0000

The PDF? You think correct.

By: Paul Renault

Paul Renault — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:48:00 +0000

That was my suspicion, too, and I forgot to mention it. I’ve edited my reply to underscore it.

Thanks.

By: elix

elix — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:39:00 +0000

PaulR has covered what the six factors are, but I’d just like to point out your error. You’re quoting the four factor test of Fair Use under US copyright law. No such element exists in Canadian law.

Instead, Canada has a similar, but not identical, section of rights carved out under the umbrella of Fair Dealing. Canadian copyright law suffers from the curse of being similar enough to US copyright law that a lot of people assume it’s the same, but the actual details and mechanics do vary in a number of key places. I’m no law expert, so I can’t speak on it with great authority myself, but there are some fairly big differences.

But you were on the right track, at least. :D

By: Paul Renault

Paul Renault — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:26:00 +0000

Methinks you didn’t read the decision. Quoting from it:

[32]
The SCC [Supreme Court of Canada] set out several factors that may be relevant in determining whether dealing is fair in CCH, at paragraph 53:
(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.

Yep, I count six factors.

By: Ipo

Ipo — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 19:53:00 +0000

The decision then includes an analysis of the six factor test and concludes that the use was fair.

It’s a four factor test.

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of the copyrighted work.

Or what else?