This is a follow-up to Gary Rodrigues’ excellent discussion about Access Copyright on July 26. Access Copyright has some proposed changes to its tariff before the Copyright Board of Canada. In contention: the high jump in fees per student in academic institutions, and Access Copyright’s definition of “copy” which includes uses already permitted under the Copyright Act.

Some good write-ups about the proposed tariff increase (from anti-tariff viewpoints): Michael Geist, Howard Knopf and Techdirt. I was looking for something pro-tariff not written by Access Copyright themselves, but didn’t see anything. Additional links welcome in the comments! . . . [more]

As we were alerted in a comment by Nick Holmes last year at this time, the U.K. has gathered together in one place nearly all of its online legislation. Legislation.gov.uk is managed by Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, in turn part of the U.K. National Archives. At the moment the site is still lacking a promised “changes to legislation” function that will chart the various amendments, repeals, etc. to legislation occurring since 2002. There is, however, a point-in-time search facility.

Curiously, I’ve been unable to find a statement on the site as to whether the online version of . . . [more]

An English court has ruled that the material hyperlinked to an online article alleged to be defamatory can be read to put the article in ‘context’ to understand its meaning: Islam Expo Ltd v The Spectator [2010] EWHC 2011 (QB). (See the story on OutLaw.com.)

Despite the rather unusual statement by the judge that he took the hyperlinked material into account “without thereby intending to imply any ruling, one way or the other, as to whether that approach is right in law” (para 15), I don’t find what he did to be unusual.

Would not a Canadian court do . . . [more]

The Federal Register, the daily journal of the United States Government including changes to rules and regulations, is celebrating its 75th anniversary, has relaunched its website and re-envisioned their services. Federal Register 2.0 is organized like a daily newspaper and is part of the open government initiatives under the Obama administration.

This video (which also appears on the new website under “About Federal Register 2.0”) provides additional detail about the history of the Federal Register and the changes:

Also note the website is using images from photo sharing site Flickr made available for use under Creative Commons licensing. . . . [more]

Ontario Bill 68, The Open for Business Act, 2010 was recently tabled in Legislature. The aim of the Bill is to create a more competitive business climate in the province, while protecting the environment and public interest. Among the over 100 proposed amendments to various pieces of legislation, broadly stated, the upcoming changes would:

There has been a lot of press over the latest countries that don’t want Blackberries in their country unless they can get access to monitor user communications. See, for example, the Washington Post, Techdirt, Engadget.

RIM designed Blackberry communications so they would be secure, in a way that RIM itself can’t even access them. That’s a great feature that makes privacy advocates, corporate users, and individual users very happy. 

But it also makes some governments very unhappy – particularly those who believe they need to spy on communications. Some to the extent that they threaten to ban . . . [more]

My colleague Laurel Murdoch showed me the latest issue of the Harvard Law School Bulletin, the lead article focusing on the changes happening at the Harvard Law Library, led by John G. Palfrey, the Law School’s vice dean for library and information resources (formerly of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society). Palfrey is the author of a very interesting piece that Louis alerted us to, entitled Cornerstones of Law Libraries for an Era of Digital-Plus

Palfrey’s piece ends with a collaborative challenge:

Our next step should be a process akin to a design charrette.60 We ought to

. . . [more]

In the middle of May, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon introduced Bill C-26, the Transboundary Waters Protection Act, which has received 1st reading. According to the (as usual) excellent legislative summary from the Parliamentary Information and Research Service, the Bill has as its main features expansion of the waters affected by the existing prohibition on bulk water removals. Now waters that flow across the boundary between the U.S. and Canada are included, whereas before only waters that straddle the boundary were affected.

Prohibited “bulk removal” is defined as follows:

“bulk removal” means the removal of water from boundary

. . . [more]

Earlier this week the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) called for a tightening of the Takeover Code because too many British companies were being taken over by foreign interests,

It agrees with business secretary Vince Cable that many mergers fail to create value for shareholders, and that our liberal takeover regime means British firms attract more bids than European and US competitors.

The CBI’s views were contained in its submission to the Takeover Panel, which is reviewing the rules after last year’s uproar over the £11.7bn takeover of Cadbury by Kraft of the US. The public consultation on possible reforms

. . . [more]

On July 28, 2010, US District Judge Susan Bolton said the US administration “is likely to succeed” in its argument and issued a preliminary injunction suspending the implementation of several key provisions of Arizona’s immigration law that were to come into force July 29, 2010.

Norwegian lawyer Fredrik Heffermehl, who holds an LLM from NYU, argued in his book, Nobels vilje published in 2008, that half the awards of the Peace Prize have not conformed to Alfred Nobel’s 1895 testamentary intentions. Now his book is about to be published in translation as The Nobel Peace Prize: What Nobel Really Wanted and the issue is being mooted in the English-speaking press.

Heffermehl’s interpretation is that “Nobel did not establish a prize for ‘peace’ in whatever guise, but a prize for work for peace in certain ways and certain fields” [emphasis in the original]; . . . [more]

Chris Berzins is a long-time member of the Canadian administrative tribunal community and someone whose writings I’ve followed for some time. When he recently forwarded a copy of his most recent article – called “Administrative Transparency and the Protection of Privacy in a Digital Era,” now published in the May 2010 supplement of The Advocates’ Quarterly – I jumped on the opportunity to invite him to an interview.

We talked last week, and had a wide-ranging conversation that led me to conclude that Chris is a guy who has a very honourable commitment to seeing that administrative tribunals do things . . . [more]