Monday, July 30, 2012

expanded fair dealing: attribution no longer required?


Wow, it did not take long at all after the recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions around certain tiny aspects of educational fair dealing for a brand new educational fair dealing handbook to be published.

It has been about two weeks since the SCC rulings, and already Contact North: Ontario's Distance Education & Training Network has produced a snazzy-looking PDF called  The Perfect Storm: Canadian Copyright Law 2012 Making Sense of the Dramatic Changes and the Far-Reaching Implications for Online Learning. It's almost as if they had the thing ready to go before the rulings came down.

Calling the recent passing of Bill C-11 and the SCC rulings "no less than a seismic shift in the copyright law with far-reaching implications for post-secondary education," The Perfect Storm goes on to examine the painfully mixed metaphor of a storm-ravaged and/or post-quake copyright landscape in Canada.

How could Contact North have created such a comprehensive document is such a short period of time after SCC decisions that must have taken a great deal of study to digest?

Oh... I see... they just copied their "analysis" of the SCC decisions from Michael Geist's blog:

Perfect Storm, page 6:

"It will be very difficult for educational institutions to justify the Access Copyright licence in light of these decisions. This is not to say that entire books will be copied without compensation. They clearly won’t since that copying would likely fail on most of the factors of the stage two six-factor test. However, for shorter excerpts – earlier case law indicated as much as a full article or chapter in a book –this copying will benefit from a strong fair dealing argument."
Michael Geist’s July 17th blog posting:

"Indeed, it will be very difficult for educational institutions to justify the Access Copyright licence in light of this decision. This is not to say that entire books will be copied without compensation. They clearly won't since that copying would likely fail on most of the factors of the six factor test. However, for shorter excerpts - CCH said as much as a full article or chapter in a book - this copying will benefit from a strong fair dealing argument."
No attribution. No quotation marks even.

Perfect Storm, page 4:

"The Supreme Court first raised the notion of balancing creator rights and user rights in 2004. Publisher and creator groups had urged the Court during the December 2011 hearings to backtrack on its user rights approach, claiming it was merely a metaphor, yet the Court used these cases to re-emphasize its importance. For educators and educational institutions, this confirms that all copyright cases will be assessed through a lens that ensures their rights as users are respected."
Michael Geist’s July 20th blog posting:

"The court first raised the notion of balancing creator rights and user rights in 2004. Publisher and creator groups had urged the court during the December 2011 hearings to backtrack on its user rights approach claiming it was merely a metaphor, yet the court used these cases to re-emphasize its importance. The user rights analysis affects virtually all copyright cases, forcing all courts to ensure that there is a fair balance between the interests of creators and users."
No attribution. No quotation marks even.
Perfect Storm, page 5:

"Both decisions point to a very broad approach to fair dealing that can be used by education groups to make the case that innovative uses of copyright materials qualifies as fair dealing and therefore does not require prior permission or compensation. In the months ahead, the education community is likely to rethink its approach to copyright licensing in light of the decisions."
Michael Geist’s July 20th blog posting:

"Both decisions point to a very broad approach to fair dealing that can be used by a wide range of businesses and education groups to make the case that innovative uses of copyright materials qualifies as fair dealing and therefore does not require prior permission or compensation. In the months ahead, online providers may offer samples using the same fair dealing analysis, the education community is likely to rethink its approach to copyright licensing, and businesses may argue that their copying is done on behalf of their clients."
No attribution. No quotation marks even.

Etc., etc. I expect Michael Geist, being a professional academic in good standing, will make sure Contact North gives him full credit for their opinions.


Welcome to Fair Dealingland (previously Canada). Pick up your freecult membership card at the kiosk, and then feel free to plagiarize anything, anytime, for any purpose.

The Supreme Court said it was okay!




 Bookmark and Share





3 comments:

Sandy Crawley said...

Right John, except that is NOT what the Supremes said at all, they merely sent the issue back to the copyright board (in case some readers haven't read your earlier posts on this matter).

John said...

Hey, I never said they were plagiarizing the truth. I said they were plagiarizing Michael Geist.

Entirely different things.

openid said...

Geist vice!