Product Details
Book S.O. Annual/biannual/biennial
Annual volumes supplied on standing order subscription
Approximately 1480 pages
1 volume bound

Can We Help?

If you need assistance, please call us at (416) 609-3800 (Toronto & international) / 1-800-387-5164 (toll free Canada & US).

We will be glad to assist you.

The 2019 Annotated Copyright Act
By: Normand Tamaro, LL.D.
Availability: In Stock

The ideal portable research tool providing statute, legislation, case law, and in-depth commentary pertaining to the Copyright Act of Canada

Its exclusive combination of statute and case law with in-depth analysis makes The 2019 Annotated Copyright Act ideal for use as your portable research tool. This work has become a fixture of copyright law practice in Canada in the 26 years since the first edition was published in 1992. Written by an experienced practitioner and academic, this convenient one-stop reference brings together all the information you need to efficiently practice copyright law.

The 2019 Annotated Copyright Act brings the legislation, case law, and commentary up to date since the last edition.

New in this edition

Updated statutes include:

  • Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, as amended by 2017, c. 26, ss. 5-10; 2018, c. 10, s. 82
  • Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46

New case law includes:

  • Bell Canada v. Lackman, 2018 FCA 42 an illustration of an order in the case of infringement involving communications signals.
  • Paragon Testing Enterprises Inc. v. Lee, 2018 BCSC 634, 2018 CarswellBC 954 Courts avoid awarding double compensation to the owner of the copyright for a single infringement. Therefore, the Court will not award damages for loss of profit if it awards to the owner of the copyright the profits made by the infringer.
  • Houle v. Thériault, 2018 QCCQ 1757 In the case of pictures of immovables used without the authorization of the owner of the copyright in online stores, the Court of Québec, Small Claims Division, awarded $1,800.
  • Syndicat des professeurs de l’État du Québec (SPEQ) v. Ministère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation du Québec (MAPAQ)-Institut de technologie agroalimentaire (ITA), 2018 CanLII 33548 (QC SAT) An arbitrator found that the preparation of course outlines and scoring grids was an integral part of the work description of a college teacher, and the employer (a college), holds copyright in those documents.
  • Keatley Surveying Ltd. v. Teranet Inc., 2017 ONCA 748, leave to appeal granted 2018 CarswellOnt 9979, 2018 CarswellOnt 9980 Section 12 of the Copyright Act applies to the Provincial Crown and the Crown in right of the provinces and the territories.
  • Lainco inc. c. Commission scolaire des Bois-Francs, 2017 CF 825 an engineering firm that produced infringing plans was held liable for the infringement of the right to produce the plans and the right to authorize the tridimensional reproduction of those plans.
  • Evans and Hong v. Upward Construction, 2017 BCPC 247 While the client had formulated ideas for the preparation of the plans, it was the creator of the drawings who had expressed the ideas and augmented the pre-existing ideas.
  • Toronto Real Estate Board v. Commissioner of Competition, 2017 CAF 236, (S.C.C., Jan 30, 2018)
  • Bégon Fawcett v. Colas, 2017 QCCS 4835, 2017 CarswellQue 9481 the plaintiff Bégon cannot claim a copyright in her written documents, her working papers, her school work and all the material she adduced as evidence before the Court. What the plaintiff claims is a copyright in the purpose of those documents, what she has been working on, namely her business project.
  • Éditions Québec Amérique Inc. v. Druide Informatique Inc., 2017 QCCS 4092 The defendant in an infringement claim has the burden of establishing consent. A gratuitous consent may always be withdrawn, while the mere transfer of a copy of a work does not mean consent has been given.
  • Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre v. Charbonneau, 2017 BCCA 395 (CanLII) The Court recognized, at the interlocutory stage, that a documentary filmmaker could use footage shot at an aquarium for the purpose of criticism to encourage a debate on the protection of marine animals.
  • Wiseau Studio et al. v. Richard Harper, 2017 ONSC 6535 At the interlocutory stage, the Court held that a documentary on a cult movie that contained seven minutes of excerpts from the movie fell within the exception for the purpose of criticism and research.
  • Google Inc. v. Equustek Solutions Inc., 2017 CSC 34 Particularly with respect to the Internet, that type of injunction may apply to a third party and extend to the world if the Canadian court has in personam jurisdiction.
About the Author
Normand Tamaro, LL.D, is a lawyer with Mannella, Gauthier, Tamaro, in Montreal, where he specializes in intellectual property law, and in particular copyright issues. He is a professor and was previously attaché to the Public Law Research Centre at the University of Montreal.
Learn more about eBooks and eLooseleafs
More Information
More Titles in