CANADIAN NEWSPAPER COPYRIGHT CASE


The Globe and Mail reports that the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled against it in a case involving copyright in articles by freelance journalists. Freelance journalist Heather Robertson argued that a licence she gave to the newspaper in 1995 to reproduce her article did not give the paper the right to reproduce it in a database of past articles. According to the article:
"The right to reproduce a collective work under the Copyright Act does not carry with it the right to republish freelance articles as part of an entirely different collective work," the majority said.

They added that to do otherwise would de-contextualize articles "to the point that they are no longer presented in a manner that maintains their intimate connection with the rest of that newspaper."
However, reproducing the article as part of a CD Rom which would contained electronic copies of the newspaper pages would not infringe.

The case will now proceed to trial.

The IPKat doesn’t see how this decision serves the public interest. It would appear to block off the production of a socially valuable new database, since it would be administratively impossible for a newspaper to go back through its archives in order to gain licences from all of the freelance journalists from whom it has ever purchased work.
CANADIAN NEWSPAPER COPYRIGHT CASE CANADIAN NEWSPAPER COPYRIGHT CASE Reviewed by Anonymous on Friday, October 13, 2006 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.