Thursday, September 27, 2012

The Access Copyright Proposed Post-Secondary Tariff Proceeding Proceeds at the Copyright Board



Even before the October 1, 2012 deadline that the Board had set to hear from the “opt-out” universities – whose association, the AUCC, abruptly withdrew from the hearing on April 24, 2012 and left them without representation - the Board has gone ahead and set the schedule for the remainder of this hearing. Here's the Board's order from less than one hour ago:


From: "Gilles.McDougall@cb-cda.gc.ca" <Gilles.McDougall@cb-cda.gc.ca>
Date: Thursday, 27 September, 2012 2:07 PM
To: Ariel Katz <ariel.katz@utoronto.ca>, "Randall.hofley@blakes.com" <Randall.hofley@blakes.com>, "Nancy.Brooks@blakes.com" <Nancy.Brooks@blakes.com>, "aoneill@fasken.com" <aoneill@fasken.com>, "wanda.noel@bell.net" <wanda.noel@bell.net>, "Gbloom@osler.com" <Gbloom@osler.com>, "gov@CASA.ca" <gov@CASA.ca>, David Fewer <dfewer@uottawa.ca>, "athomas@fasken.com" <athomas@fasken.com>, "smagu039@uottawa.ca" <smagu039@uottawa.ca>, "jordan.snel@bell.net" <jordan.snel@bell.net>, "BFong@osler.com" <BFong@osler.com>, "MKlee@osler.com" <MKlee@osler.com>, "wanda.noel@sympatico.ca" <wanda.noel@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Access Copyright - Post-Secondary Educational Institutions Tariff 2011-2013 - Hearing Schedule

RULING OF THE BOARD
The schedule in the above-referenced proceedings shall be as follows:
Filing, with the Board, of replies to objections to interrogatories in abeyance: no later than Friday, September 28, 2012
[Board Ruling]
Responses to interrogatories in abeyance: no later than Friday, December 21, 2012
Motions re: incomplete/unsatisfactory responses to interrogatories in abeyance: no later than Friday, February 8, 2013
Filing, with the Board, of replies to motions: no later than Friday, March 1, 2013
[Board Ruling]
Complete/satisfactory responses to interrogatories in abeyance: no later than Friday, April 26, 2013
Filing of Access’ Case: no later than Friday, September 6, 2013
Filing of Objectors' Case: no later than Friday, December 20, 2013
Filing of Access’ Reply: no later than Monday, January 27, 2014
Beginning of hearing: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., Copyright Board's hearing room.
Access Copyright is granted 7 weeks to prepare deficiency complaints. ACCC is granted 3 weeks to respond. Access proposed 8+2 weeks. ACCC proposed 6+4 weeks. Access needs more time to analyze all responses than ACCC to respond to deficiency complaints. The Board’s original schedule proposed 7+3. That is what the Board adopts.
Access is granted 18 weeks from the date set to provide full responses to the interrogatories in abeyance to file its case. ACCC is granted 16 weeks from the time Access will file its case to file its response. Access proposed 20+14 weeks, ACCC 17+17 weeks. Access can start its case preparation with the information it already has. However, the time allotted to Access should be longer if only because it includes the Summer.
The period between the filing of the reply of Access and the beginning of the hearing shall be 2 weeks, not 10 days as Access proposed or 17 days as proposed by ACCC. This should be sufficient to account for the Christmas season.
The indulgence requested by counsel for Access in her letter of September 21 is denied. Accordingly, the section of that letter dealing with the schedule leading up to the hearing is struck from the record.
Gilles McDougall
Secretary General | Secrétaire général

Copyright Board of Canada | Commission du droit d'auteur du Canada
56 Sparks, Suite| Bureau 800
Ottawa ON K1A 0C9
Telephone | Téléphone 613.952.8624
Gilles.mcdougall@cb-cda.gc.ca

Sunday, September 09, 2012

Global Competitiveness Report 2012-13 – Canada Once Again Beats the USA

Here are the latest World Economic Forum (WEF) rankings for intellectual property for 2012-2013.

Canada is #17, ahead of Japan, Australia, the United States and Korea. Interestingly, the USA, which ranks at #29 just behind Barhrain and just ahead of Barbados, continues to castigate Canada and to place Canada amongst the worst of the worst (along with the likes of Algeria, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine) in the USTR’s “Special 301” report, which is significantly based upon IIPA “research”. The IIPA is an influential lawyer/lobbyist driven Washington organization that mainly represents major players in the American film, music, publishing, video game and software industries.

Rank
Entity
Edition filter
1
Finland
2012-2013
2
Singapore
2012-2013
3
New Zealand
2012-2013
4
Switzerland
2012-2013
5
Netherlands
2012-2013
6
United Kingdom
2012-2013
7
Luxembourg
2012-2013
8
Qatar
2012-2013
9
France
2012-2013
10
Germany
2012-2013
11
Hong Kong SAR
2012-2013
12
Sweden
2012-2013
13
Puerto Rico
2012-2013
14
Norway
2012-2013
15
Ireland
2012-2013
16
Austria
2012-2013
17
Canada
2012-2013
18
Japan
2012-2013
19
Australia
2012-2013
20
South Africa
2012-2013
21
Denmark
2012-2013
22
Taiwan, China
2012-2013
23
United Arab Emirates
2012-2013
24
Belgium
2012-2013
25
Oman
2012-2013
26
Iceland
2012-2013
27
Saudi Arabia
2012-2013
28
Bahrain
2012-2013
29
United States
2012-2013
30
Barbados
2012-2013
31
Malaysia
2012-2013
32
Rwanda
2012-2013
33
Israel
2012-2013
34
Estonia
2012-2013
35
Malta
2012-2013
36
Gambia, The
2012-2013
37
Liberia
2012-2013
38
Panama
2012-2013
39
Jordan
2012-2013
40
Korea, Rep.
2012-2013

(highlight added) 


HPK