On September 2, 2017, the Government of Canada published the proposed Breach of Security Safeguards Regulations (“Regulations”). The proposed Regulations provide additional clarity and substance to the mandatory requirements for breaches of security safeguards which were added to Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) in June 2015 but have yet to be declared into force. The Government of Canada will be accepting comments on the proposed Regulations until October 2, 2017.
The new breach notification requirements will add significant financial and administrative burdens for organizations handling personal information regulated by PIPEDA, including organizations located outside of Canada which collect, use or disclose personal information about Canadian individuals.
Successful interlocutory injunctions in trade-mark proceedings before the Federal Court were once considered to be as rare as Sasquatch sightings. A substantial hurdle for moving parties requesting such relief has been demonstrating irreparable harm. However, the decision issued last week in Sleep Country Canada Inc. v Sears Canada Inc, 2017 FC 148 [Sleep Country] further signals the Federal Court’s readiness to conclude that certain harms are impossible to calculate and, therefore, qualify as irreparable.
This morning, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang, 2016 SCC 50 (Trang), overturning the reasoning of two decisions of the Ontario Court of Appeal. In the SCC’s view, thePersonal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000 c. 5 (“PIPEDA”) does not preclude a mortgagee from producing a mortgage discharge statement to a judgment creditor. The unanimous decision, written by Justice Côté, concluded that such disclosure was in accordance with an order made by a court or, alternatively, that the mortgagors had provided implied consent.
Yesterday, the Federal Court released its decision inBlacklock’s Reporter v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 1255, a copyright infringement action involving the circulation of articles about the Department of Finance and sugar tariffs. Over the past couple months, the case receivedconsiderablemediaattention given its possibility of addressing fair dealing, copyright misuse and circumvention of technological protection measures (TPMs). Despite the fanfare surrounding Blacklock’s, the case was decided on a straightforward application of fair dealing and the Supreme Court of Canada’s jurisprudence on the subject. Cue the sad music for copyright nerds.
This week, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (“CRTC”) released its first substantial decision on Canada’s Anti-Spam legislation (“CASL”). The decision, CRTC 2016-428, significantly reduced the administrative monetary penalty (“AMP”) payable by Blackstone Learning Corp, and shed some light on the CRTC’s interpretation of CASL violations.
After initiating a proposed class action lawsuit alleging copyright infringement in respect of five motion pictures (I have previously blogged on the Notice of Application), Voltage Pictures LLC (“Voltage”) has successfully persuaded the Federal Court to order the partial disclosure of subscriber information in order to proceed with certification of its “reverse” class action.
On Friday, June 17, 2016, Conservative MP Peter Van Loan introducedBill C-299, a private member’s bill entitled “An Act to amend the Copyright Act (term of copyright).” The bill proposes to amend the Copyright Act to extend Canada’s copyright term to life of the author plus 70 years. Presently, most works are protected under Canadian copyright law for the life of the author plus 50 years (with the exception of sound recordings and performer’s performances, which are protected for the life of the author plus 70 years). Continue reading “Private Member’s Bill Proposes to Extend Copyright Term”