notice and notice Archives

Copyright notice and notice: the Voltage Pictures Case

The Federal Court of Appeal released an important decision comprehensively reviewing the notice and notice regime in the Copyright Act (the “N&N regime”) in Voltage Pictures v. Robert Salna 2025 FCA 131. A central issue in the case was whether Voltage could use the N&N regime to serve certification notices under its proposed reverse copyright class action against Internet subscribers accused of sharing movies over BitTorrent. The Court of Appeal affirmed the certification judge’s opinion that notices of certification were not a notice of claimed infringement under the regime and internet service providers had no obligation to forward them.…

View Post

ISPs fees for complying with Norwich orders: Rogers v Voltage

Who bears the costs of complying with Norwich orders? These orders require ISPs to disclose the identify of their subscribers to enable copyright owners to bring legal proceedings against suspected infringers. The issue was resolved earlier today by the Supreme Court in Rogers Communications Inc. v. Voltage Pictures, LLC, 2018 SCC 38.

In an 8-1 decision written by Brown J, (with whom Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Rowe and Martin JJ agreed) the Court held that ISPs must bear the costs of complying with their obligations under s41.26(2) of the notice and notice regime.…

View Post

Notice and notice regime under C-11 coming into force

The Government announced today that the notice and notice regime established under C-11 is coming into force in January 2015. The delay in bringing these provisions into force was a consultations on possible regulations that the regime permitted. The Government announced that the provisions are coming into force without regulations.

The regime permits copyright owners to send notices to internet service providers and other internet intermediaries claiming infringement of copyright. The notices must be passed on by these service providers to their users.…

View Post

Change and the Copyright Modernization Act

Bill C-11, the Copyright Modernization Act, with a few exceptions, is now law with the publication of the Governor General Order in Council. The fourth attempt to amend the Copyright Act since 2005 succeeded where Bills C-60 (2005), C-61 (2008), and C-32 (2010) did not.

A lot has changed since 2005 when Bill C-60 was first introduced. That Bill would have made a limited, but important, set of amendments. Its summary reminds us that it would have amended the “Copyright Act to implement the provisions of the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, to clarify the liability of network service providers, to facilitate technology-enhanced learning and interlibrary loans, and to update certain other provisions of the Act.” …

View Post

UK moving ahead with graduated response after Hargreaves Review of IP

Last week, the UK government confirmed its intention to implement the graduated response process set out in the UK Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA). Several documents released along with the response to Professor Hargreaves’ Review of Intellectual Property and Growth summarized the UK process and compared it with the graduated response processes enacted in France and New Zealand. See, Draft-Sharing-of-Costs statutory-instrument, Impact Assessment for the Sharing of Costs Statutory Instrument, and Digital Economy Act Appeals Process: Options for reducing costs.…

View Post

UK proposals to modernize UK Copyright Act released

The UK Government outlined plans earlier today to support economic growth by modernising the UK’s intellectual property laws. The Government accepted a number of recommendations made by Professor Ian Hargreaves in his report, Digital Opportunity: A review of intellectual property and growth in its response to Professor Hargreaves’ Review of Intellectual Property and Growth. The Government’s response can be found online at www.ipo.gov.uk/ipresponse.

The UK Government also simultaneously published a series of other reports including: Next steps for implementation of the Digital Economy Act, “Site blocking” to reduce online copyright infringement, Draft-Sharing-of-Costs statutory-instrument, Impact Assessment for the Sharing of Costs Statutory Instrument, Digital Economy Act Appeals Process: Options for reducing costs, International Strategy, and IP Crime Strategy.…

View Post

New Zealand passes law to reduce online file sharing

New Zealand just enacted legislation that puts in place a three-notice regime to deter illegal file sharing.

The three-notice regime involves ISPs sending warning notices to their customers informing them they may have infringed copyright. The legislation extends the jurisdiction of the NZ Copyright Tribunal to provide an efficient, low-cost process to hear illegal file-sharing claims. The tribunal will be able to make awards of up to $15,000 based on damage sustained by the copyright owner.

The bill includes a power for a district court to suspend an internet account for up to six months, in appropriate circumstances.…

View Post

The Liberal Digital Canada Plan and Copyright

Earlier today, Marc Garneau and guest commentators Michael Geist and Steve Anderson had a live online chat about the Liberal Digital Canada Plan. A transcription of the chat is available here.

The Liberal Digital Plan says the following about copyright:

Fair balance Between Creators and Consumers.

Digital technology offers many new opportunities, but enjoying content without compensating its creators shouldn’t be among them. At the same time, consumers should have freedom for personal use of digital content they rightfully possess.

…

View Post

Rethinking notice and notice after C-32 (now C-11)

Canada’s last three copyright bills, C-60, C-61 and C-32, attempted to curb illegal online file sharing by requiring ISPs to forward notices of claimed infringements to customers. Canada’s ISPs had advocated for this “notice and notice” process claiming it was effective. However, they never produced any empirical evidence or studies to back up their claims.

On March 22, 2010 – before the federal election was called- TELUS, Bell and Rogers appeared before the Special Legislative Committee studying Bill C-32. The ISPs continued to endorse notice and notice asking that this process be formalized in C-32.…

View Post

Subscribe