This paper is intended for library practitioners and information professionals, presenting a deep dive into the Canadian case law that relates to fair dealing, a user’s right, with a particular focus on CCH and subsequent cases from 2004 to 2024. Readers will learn the importance of fair dealing, discovering how decisions from the courts can be used to help users of copyrighted works conduct fair dealing analyses by considering the six fair dealing factors prescribed by the Supreme Court of Canada in CCH. This “paper” does not follow a typical structure expected of a research paper, and is not meant to be read as a complete work. Rather, the summaries and excerpts provided below are to be used as references for those researching fair dealing or conducting fair dealing analyses. The genesis of the 2024 ABC Copyright Conference presentation, available in the ABC 2024 collection and copies of all cases referenced in both our presentation and this paper are available in an open reading list.
This article documents the process and guidelines developed to respond to a library practitioner’s question as to what constitutes a reasonable search, in the context of section 32 of the Canadian Copyright Act. In answering the question, the authors decided that a Canadian guide would be helpful to all practitioners facing the same question, and they undertook a project to create “Accessible Content: A Guide to the Canadian Copyright Act on Searching for Accessible Formats and Producing and Distributing Alternate Formats” (----, 2025). The authors formed a multi-stakeholder coalition, and developed a set of guidelines aimed at aiding practitioners to understand and apply the exceptions in the Copyright Act that enable the reproduction of works for persons with perceptual disabilities.
This paper examines the potential of Secondary Publishing Rights (SPR) as a legal solution to safeguard Green Open Access (OA) and promote free and global access to Canadian research. SPR grants journal article authors the right to deposit a version of a finished article in an institutional or disciplinary repository, regardless of publisher agreements. If implemented in Canada, SPR will empower researchers, allowing them to make their work OA while also providing them with an easy path to ensuring compliance with OA funder mandates. In this paper, we compare SPR to alternatives like Rights Retention Strategies (RRS) and collective licensing, highlighting the variations of SPR implemented in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Bulgaria. Adopting SPR in Canada will significantly improve public access to research, strengthen Canada's global research impact, and create a more equitable scholarly publishing landscape.
Library employees routinely create content that is subject to copyright, ranging from web pages to video tutorials to photographs to social media posts. In most cases these contributions are invisible, as the creativity and intellectual effort of employee creators is typically unacknowledged. At the University of Guelph, we endeavoured to bring the works of employees into the spotlight by providing attribution on public-facing content whenever possible, while also facilitating downstream uses of those works through the use of open licenses. In doing so, we hoped to address a general lack of awareness and understanding of copyright and model respectful copyright practices for library employees and users alike. However, establishing and implementing these new copyright-focused practices was not without challenge and controversy. This paper – which builds upon a presentation we delivered at the 2024 ABC Copyright Conference (Martin & Versluis, 2024) – explores the obstacles we encountered in our multi-year journey to develop practices that were acceptable to content creators and content managers, while also respecting the boundaries of institutional intellectual property policies and collective agreements. Keywords: copyright literacy, staff development, copyright ownership, employee created works, library policy and documentation
Many federally funded research grants include requirements that scientists communicate their research to the public as a means to increase scientific literacy and overall public trust in science. To address this critical societal need, scientists and a university-based science filmmaker at Rutgers University developed a collaborative science film storytelling model that has successfully translated federally funded research to the public by way of more than a dozen high-quality science films that involve university students in the storytelling process. These interdisciplinary science film projects take place at a time when university intellectual property policies are facing new challenges as teaching, research, and collaborative creative works increasingly take place on digital platforms where products and materials can be easily duplicated and shared. Thus, the need to define the terms of creative ownership and joint copyright at the onset of these science film projects, which include narrative visualization of federally funded research processes and involve many co-creators, has become pressing. This article shares suggestions for the development of memoranda of understanding between creative collaborators working together with scientists on film projects made in university settings that document and communicate federally funded science into compelling and relatable stories for the broader public.
Fair Game is an online computer game that teaches undergraduate students about ethically using copyrighted materials in course assignments. The game, created in a collaboration between Augusta University Libraries and the Center for Instructional Innovation, focuses on the doctrine of fair use and its four factors. This article presents a case study on the game’s design and development following a recommended practice from the literature: mapping an information literacy model to gameplay using the game design theory of aligning game mechanics to learning mechanics. The authors discuss their experience with mapping portions of the Association of College and Research Libraries framework (2015) and using the Learning Mechanics–Game Mechanics Model (Arnab et al., 2015) for designing Fair Game. The authors recommend future game makers also consider aligning motivational learning theories to game design.
This article is part of a three-part series that seeks an understanding of circumstances in which educational institutions may engage in educational copying (making unauthorized multiple copies of course readings for student use) in five common law countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Part 1 considers copyright’s purpose and justifications and then surveys the parameters of copyright law—including users’ rights (copyright exceptions or limitations)—and licensing arrangements as presented in the copyright statutes of the five countries.
Copyright guidance at an academic library is often provided at the nexus of the law, University policy, and the personal and professional values of the librarians and users involved in the decision making. An institution’s tolerance for risk (or lack-thereof) can create tension with librarians’ value systems. The law is often vague, leaving lots of room for differences of interpretation between University administrators, librarians, and users. Professional values, like the ones articulated by the ACRL Framework generally align with enhancing/supporting user’s rights and tend towards a copyleft point of view. Institutional risk tolerance complicates decision making further. Higher levels of risk are generally accepted with research and teaching endeavours, directly in contrast with a lower level of risk acceptable when it comes to compliance with the law (like the Copyright Act). Lack of clarity in the law and institutional risk tolerance can be at odds with professional values, which can confuse users and undermine librarians providing guidance. This article provides a beginning framework for understanding reasonableness in copyright decisions while taking into account the variety of pressures on copyright librarians. A set of cases are used to test the framework and a reasonableness chart is provided to allow for comparison of the cases.
This article builds upon a presentation given at the 2024 ABC Copyright Conference in which the authors outlined the process for adapting the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Open Educational Resources (OER) for a Canadian audience. Originally published in 2021, the U.S. Code is an important tool for evaluating common OER use cases, providing a framework of analysis that can guide a creator towards making judiciously defensible fair use decisions. Alongside practical guidance, the Code represents a significant contribution in support of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)’s Recommendation on OER, which encourages member states to build capacity concerning exceptions and limitations for the use of copyrighted works for educational and research purposes. Supported by the Canadian Association of Research Libraries, the Canadian Adaptation Working Group began their adaptation process in late 2021 and the final Code was published in early 2024. In addition to providing an overview of the adaptation process, this article offers a comprehensive summary of the legal considerations that informed the writing of the Code and provides examples of how the Code has been operationalized at educational institutions in Canada.
This paper advocates for a view of copyright not as economic incentive or reward, but as a critical piece of a broader social policy, the goal of which is to help build a just and inclusive society. Copyright can play an important role in helping build such a society, in that the exclusive rights granted to creators under copyright legislation, as well as the limits placed on those rights, can be structured in ways that help advance this goal. However, copyright alone can only do so much. In seeking to build a just and inclusive society, copyright must be embedded within, and seen as part of, a broader system of supports, incentives, and social programs focused on justice and inclusion. This paper will identify several ways in which the current Canadian copyright regime is in tension with the goal of building a just and inclusive society. It will then highlight a number of supports, incentives, and programs that together with copyright can help make our society more just and inclusive. In particular, it will emphasize the important role played by libraries in seeking to build a society in which everyone has the opportunity to learn, create, and communicate in ways that are consistent with one’s own cultural and legal traditions, and in an environment that is safe and secure.
For over a decade, members of Canada’s creative industries have claimed that Canadian post-secondary institutions are copying and using content without adequately compensating creators; these campaigns have primarily focused on fiction authors. This study aims to address these claims by determining how much Canadian creative literature is actually being used in a representative Canadian university. We analyzed reading materials provided to students as library reserves, textbooks, and course packs for the periods 2010-2012 and 2018-2022 and found that across both periods approximately 1.3% of courses assigned Canadian creative works as readings. An analysis of only the Fall semesters across these periods found that approximately 0.7% of all works – that is, copied excerpts and uncopied (purchased) works – assigned via library reserves, textbooks, and course packs were Canadian creative works. The number of assigned readings that included copied Canadian creative works (generally consisting only of course packs, not textbooks and likely not library reserves) would comprise much less than 0.7%. Therefore, this research suggests that the use and specifically copying of Canadian creative content in Canadian universities is not substantial enough to result in significant potential remuneration for the copying of an author’s work.
This study builds upon and extends previous research into the phenomenon of copyright anxiety, initially measured through the Copyright Anxiety Scale (CAS) developed by Wakaruk et al. (2021). The primary aims are to explore levels of copyright anxiety within the higher education sectors of the UK and Canada, and to examine whether copyright law and the way it is perceived in these sectors inhibits innovative research and teaching practices. Using an adapted version of the copyright anxiety scale survey, we collected responses from over 500 participants in the UK and Canada during the summer of 2023. Additionally, we conducted seven focus groups with 32 individuals to gain deeper insights into the phenomenon and explore potential interventions. Our findings indicate that those working in higher education are more worried about copyright than those outside the sector. Copyright concerns can cause significant anxiety and emotional labor, which may lead to legal chill that hampers teaching, research, and the provision of library programs and services. For example, academics may use less appropriate materials due to copyright concerns, negatively affecting pedagogical impact. Librarians, often acting as copyright advisors, may experience heightened anxiety, leading them to provide more risk-averse guidance to users and decision-makers. Future publications from this research will further develop a coding frame and explore options for mitigating copyright anxiety and chill in this sector.
This paper examines the potential of Secondary Publishing Rights (SPR) as a legal solution to safeguard Green Open Access (OA) and promote free and global access to Canadian research. SPR grants journal article authors the right to deposit a version of a finished article in an institutional or disciplinary repository, regardless of publisher agreements. If implemented in Canada, SPR will empower researchers, allowing them to make their work OA while also providing them with an easy path to ensuring compliance with OA funder mandates. In this paper, we compare SPR to alternatives like Rights Retention Strategies (RRS) and collective licensing, highlighting the variations of SPR implemented in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Bulgaria. Adopting SPR in Canada will significantly improve public access to research, strengthen Canada's global research impact, and create a more equitable scholarly publishing landscape.
Academic journal articles authored by U.S. government employees are assumed to be in the public domain, though journals vary in communicating this status, and access is often not provided. To document this situation, between September 2020 and March 2021 we collected and analyzed copyright statements from a random sample of articles in PDF published in 2019 by authors affiliated with two U.S. government agencies. 13% of the sampled articles had a copyright statement indicating the U.S. public domain or U.S. government authorship. 42% of the published versions of the sampled articles were behind a paywall. Even when all authors of an article were U.S. government employees, 29% were labeled in the U.S. public domain, and 66% were behind a paywall. While copyright notices are not required, notice provides legal certainty on the usage of journal articles, which are shared among scholars, added to bibliographic managers, and posted to websites and repositories. Journal articles authored by U.S. government employees may be a source of open access that has not been fully realized, and uniquely, a retrospective source of access for scholarship. We suggest best practices for journal publishers, as well as possible actions by U.S. government agencies, library organizations, and institutional repositories. The U.S. public domain provides an opportunity to increase the number of peer-reviewed journal articles that are open access.
The Copyright Thing Doesn’t Work Here: Adinkra and Kente Cloth and Intellectual Property in Ghana, by Boatema Boateng, is an excellent case study of the uneasy fit between the global intellectual property (IP) system and postcolonial contexts, as well as a great introduction to challenges in the field for readers seeking more just IP systems. IP makes creative work legible for certain kinds of ownership: it arbitrates who can copy what, and ideally gets somebody paid. But who? The answer, in the case of adinkra and kente cloth, is often not the artisans but the nation-state that claims the work as collectively “Ghanian,” and factories in Asia that scale up production of the designs for their own, cheaper textiles. “IP” overrides the significance of the cloth to its producers and their understandings of copying, appropriate remuneration, and authorship.
In this insightful interview, Anthony Kakooza engages in a comprehensive exploration of legal frameworks and their intersection with traditional cultural expressions (TCEs). The dialogue, facilitated by Sara R. Benson and Siyao Cheng from the Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship (JCEL), delves into a nuanced analysis of the role that copyright law plays in protecting TCEs. The conversation extends to encompass a wide array of topics related to the ongoing debates surrounding TCEs. Specifically, Kakooza addresses the prevalent misunderstandings associated with TCEs and sheds light on the intricate challenges posed by a regional framework for TCE protections. Furthermore, the conversation navigates to the merits of the sui generis approach to TCE protection and explores the implications of adopting a legal framework for indigenous communities and their TCEs. Drawing on Kakooza’s educational background and field experience, the interview serves as a valuable reference for readers aiming to grasp the complex dynamics between legal mechanisms and the protection of TCEs. Keywords: copyright, traditional cultural expressions, intellectual property, sui generis, indigenous communities
There are many videos that could be used for instruction and research but are inaccessible to those who need closed captions. Academic libraries could play an important role in supporting captioning, but they are hampered by misinformation and misunderstanding about copyright law and unnecessary fear of repercussions. With a better understanding of the current state of the law and how documented practices and community norms have the power to shift the law over time, library workers can be empowered to support captioning, share resources and workflows, and document their activity openly, in collaboration with instructors and with disability services and information technology offices. This article reviews current literature on closed captioning, copyright law, disability law, and accessibility in higher education to illuminate the possibilities for library workers to support video captioning for accessibility purposes, even in cases where permission cannot be obtained from the copyright holder. The research shows an unequivocal fair use protection for educational captioning, a right that is best protected when it is actively asserted and used.
Coaching Copyright is a welcome addition to the body of literature focusing on copyright educators who are, by extension, coaches. The book follows a logical order, starting with the title topic, offering a framework to address issues, and then positioning this framework within an instructional context. The next chapters cover ways to connect with your audience, succeeded by employing the framework for particular audiences and topics, and ending with a report about a Library Science course. This publication concentrates on the people who teach copyright within academic libraries in the United States. The target audience is wide, regardless of formal job positions, and its utility stretches far beyond the core subject. Keywords: copyright, instruction, coaching, education, teaching, copyright education, higher education
In this paper, Benson, Blumenthal, and Klosek summarize the proceedings of the public symposium on the “Protection of Copyright User Rights from Contractual Override.” The American Library Association (ALA) and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL)—together, the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA)—sponsored the symposium in partnership with the American University Washington College of Law Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property (PIJIP). The paper includes summaries of each panel, questions that were discussed, and takeaways for the library community to consider. Keywords: copyright, contracts, public policy, limitations and exceptions
