Six Factors if Necessary But Not Necessarily Six FactorsReport as inadecuate




Six Factors if Necessary But Not Necessarily Six Factors - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.

fair dealing, copyright

Additional contributors:

Subject-Keyword: fair dealing copyright

Type of item: Conference-workshop Presentation

Language: English

Place:

Time:

Description: Presentation made during closing panel of Fair Dealing Week 2017 events hosted by the University of Alberta Copyright Office.

Date created: February 23, 2017

DOI: doi:10.7939-R39P2WJ3P

License information: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International

Rights:





Author: Nair, Meera

Source: https://era.library.ualberta.ca/


Teaser



CCH, para.
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 Meera Nair, Ph.D. Copyright Officer February 23, 2017 meeran@nait.ca six factors if necessary but not necessarily six factors Para.
53: “… 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.” Para: 60: “These factors may be more or less relevant to assessing the fairness of a dealing depending on the factual context of the allegedly infringing dealing.
In some contexts, there may be factors other than those listed here that may help a court decide whether the dealing was fair.” The Canadian fair dealing defense is “statutorily restrictive and not easily capable of a remedial, flexible, or evolutionary interpretation.” … The tendency amongst Canadian courts was to reject the fair dealing defense by invoking (and often creating) a bright-line mechanical rule that would preclude fair dealing on the facts of the case. Carys Craig with a nod to Howard Knopf In Michael Geist, ed., In the Public Interest: The Future of Canadian Copyright Law (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2005) The right of quotation is permitted by law; to refuse it would be in effect to suppress the right of literary criticism.
Nevertheless, a critic cannot, without rendering himself liable for infringement, reproduce the entirety of the work criticized without the authorization of the author. Angers J. Zamacoïs v.
Douville (1943) para.
107 What amounts to ‘fair dealing with any work for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or newspaper summary’ within the meaning of … the Copyright Act is a matter which must necessarily depend upon the facts of each case. Angers J. Zamacoïs v.
Douville (1943) annotation Are the...





Related documents