SIAST Copyright Office 17/Oct/2012 SCC Fair Dealing Decisions Recent Copyright Changes — Case most important to education: How do they affect you? ? Alberta (CMEC) v. Access Copyright October 2012 http://scc.lexum.org/en/2012/2012scc37/2012scc37.html — Decisions relied on C-42, not C-11 — ACCC released new fair dealing guidelines in August 2012 Nancy Pardoe Recent Copyright Changes CMEC v. AC: Background — Fair Dealing — K-12 Access Copyright tariff (2005-2009) ? “the use of a copyright-protected work certified by the Copyright Board in 2009 without permission or payment” — Survey of photocopying: category 4 ? Supreme Court of Canada: Five cases related copies (teacher initiated copies) are not to the application of fair dealing considered fair dealing ? Decisions released July 2012 — Federal Court of Appeal: Board’s decision — Copyright Modernization Act (C-11) was “reasonable” ? Royal Assent: June 29, 2012 — Supreme Court: Board misapplied the ? Not proclaimed “in force” yet CCH fair dealing factors
SIAST Copyright Office 17/Oct/2012 Fair Dealing Analysis (CCH) Step One: Is the purpose of the dealing one of the purposes enumerated in the Act? Step Two: Analysis – Is the dealing fair? 1. Predominant / real purpose 2. Character of the dealing 3. Amount taken 4. Available alternatives 5. Nature of the work 6. Effect of the dealing on the work Copyright Board Analysis (2009) Category 4 copies are not fair dealing: 1. Real purpose is instruction, not research. 2. Multiple copies made for third parties at their request is fair dealing. 3. Total amount of copying must be assessed, not the amount taken from one work. 4. Schools can purchase textbooks. 5. No existing policy / practice to restrict access. 6. The decline in textbook sales can be linked to photocopying excerpts. Supreme Court Analysis (2012) 1. User’s purpose is most relevant, not the copier’s purpose. 2. --- 3. Amount must be analyzed using an individual work, not the aggregate. 4. Buying books not a realistic alternative to copying short excerpts. 5. --- 6. No evidence linking photocopying and decline in sales.
SIAST Copyright Office 17/Oct/2012 SIAST Policy & Guidelines — “Use of Copyrighted Materials” Policy ? A-1.24 (August 2010) — Copying Guidelines ? mySIAST, Faculty Page, POP Manual, section 10.2 — Fair Dealing Guidelines ? mySIAST, Faculty Page, POP Manual, section 10.3 — Copyright Office web site ? http://www2. siast.sk.ca/departments/copyright/index.htm SIAST Fair Dealing Guidelines — Copies must be for a — Avoid cumulative fair dealing purpose copying — From a lawful copy — Should not substitute — Single copy for purchasing — Smaller amounts more materials fair: suggested — Include attribution and percentages notice — Limit the distribution — Any fees charged relate to the actual cost — Refer copying outside these guidelines Current Use of 3 rd -party works — Few restrictions: — Fair dealing applies in most ? Public domain situations: ? Links ? E-reserves (within guidelines) ? Quotes ? Classroom projection of presentations ? Distribution of presentations (remove 3rd party content) ? Classroom projection of streaming video ? One-time classroom distribution