The Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) recently released its judgment in P.S. Knight Co. Ltd. v. Canadian Standards Association, 2018 FCA 222. The Court examined how the Crown’s rights and privileges apply in the realm of copyright law.
In good news for rights-holders, the majority found that copyright subsists in a work developed by a private organization, even when incorporated by reference into statutes and regulations. However, a strong dissenting opinion argued that the work was a part of the laws of Canada and therefore subject to Crown copyright.
It remains to be seen how the law on this subject will develop going forward.
Background
The case dealt with a claim by the Canadian Standards Association (“CSA”), a federal non-profit which develops, tests and certifies voluntary standards, that P.S. Knight Co. Ltd. (“Knight Co.”) had infringed its copyright over the 2015 CSA Electrical Code (the “Code”). The Code is a voluntary CSA document dealing with electrical safety, which has been adopted by federal, provincial and territorial governments and incorporated by reference into regulation.
In 2016, Knight Co. produced and threatened to distribute CSA’s copyrighted 2015 Code at a third of the price charged by CSA. Consequently, CSA started an application under Rules 61 and 300 of the Federal Courts Rules, and the Copyright Act (the “Act”). Both the Federal Court and the FCA rejected Knight Co.’s arguments, finding that CSA held copyright over the Code and Knight Co.’s conduct infringed upon this right.
Crown Prerogative and Copyright
Knight Co. argued that the Crown possesses copyright in the Code pursuant to section 12 of the Act, which explicitly recognizes Crown copyright in works prepared or published at the control or direction of Her Majesty or any government department. The FCA held that the Code was not prepared under the control or direction of Her Majesty or any government department, noting that the CSA is a private organization.
The Court also rejected the argument that Crown prerogative could be claimed over the Code. Crown prerogative refers to rights and privileges that can be asserted by the federal or provincial Crowns over matters falling within their respective jurisdictions. The majority held that, although a typical defendant may argue that a plaintiff does not own copyright in a work, no one may assert the rights and privileges of the Crown on the Crown’s behalf. They further commented that the Crown’s common law right to print and publish certain works of a legislative nature does not extend to works incorporated by reference into regulations, like the Code.
Webb, J.A., In Dissent
The dissent specifically disagreed on this point. Justice Webb noted that the Code has been incorporated by reference into the Canada Oil and Gas Regulations adopted under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act, and non-compliance with the regulations may result in serious penalties. The implications of violating the Code remained the same even if it was merely incorporated by reference. Therefore, he would have held that the Code was part of the laws of Canada, and that Crown prerogative should apply to it in its entirety.
Justice Webb added that the Reproduction of Federal Law Order allows government enactments to be copied by any person, which should extend to regulations and anything incorporated by reference therein, including the Code. On these grounds, he would have allowed Knight Co.’s appeal.
Authors
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property
Goodmans Wins Leading IP Law Firm – IP Patents at the Lexology Awards: North America 2024
We are proud to share Goodmans has won Leading IP Law Firm - IP Patents at the Lexology Awards: North America 2024. These awards celebrate outstanding achievements and world class client… -
Intellectual Property
Protecting Heads and the Ideas Inside: Yamaha’s Augmented Reality Helmet
A Yamaha patent application has been published for a new design of an augmented reality (AR) motorcycle helmet. The design introduces transparent lenses, which aim to combine the power of the AR… -
Intellectual Property
Bad Bunny Hops into Legal Battle Over Concert Clips
Bad Bunny has reportedly sued a concertgoer for uploading extensive footage of his Utah concert to YouTube. The legal action, filed in California, marks a rare escalation in disputes typically… -
Intellectual Property
Food for Thought: IP Battle Over Butter Chicken
The Delhi High Court reportedly had its initial hearing of Rupa Gujral and Ors v. Daryaganj Hospitality Private Limited and Ors in early 2024. The plaintiff, a famous restaurant chain, Moti Mahal… -
Intellectual Property
Keeping Up With Counterfeits: Kim Kardashian Sued For Knock-Off Dining Tables
Kim Kardashian and her interior design firm, Clements Design, are reportedly being sued by the Judd Foundation for promoting “cheap knockoffs” of one of Judd’s most renowned designs, a dining table… -
Intellectual Property
Mbappé Attempts to Trademark Soccer Celebration Pose
French soccer star, Kylian Mbappé, has sought trademark protection over a logo depicting his iconic goal celebration. The logo is a black and white image of Mbappé standing with his hands tucked…