Professional Documents
Culture Documents
legal profession and judges, which was within the limits of the
exception for "fair use" - Defendant did not authorize infringement
of copyright by providing self-service photocopiers - Defendant
having been successful in respect of the appeal and cross-appeal, it
was entitled to costs in all instances.
The Plaintiffs Were Canadian publishers of law reports, law
textbooks, and --other legal publications. The defendant Was a nonprofit corporation Governed That the legal profession of Ontario
pursuant to statutory authority. The defendant maintained and
operated a reference library for members icts and the Judiciary. The
defendant HAD free-standing photocopiers for the use of library
patrons using coins and prepaid cards. Each photocopy Above, the
defendant posted a notice Stating That Certain kinds of copying
might infringe copyright law and disclaiming liability by the
defendant for infringing copies made by library patrons. The
defendant has aussi Provided custom photocopying services by
making copies available in person, by email or by facsimile
transmission machines. The defendant's "Access to the Law Policy"
provided That, for a fee, single copies of library materials required
for research, review, private study, and criticism as well as for use in
court, tribunal and government proceedings Could Be Provided to
patrons of the library.
The Plaintiffs Alleged que la defendant infringed copyright by ict
photocopying Their policies and activities in the legal profession for
Supplying the Judiciary and limited copies of legal materials
published by the Plaintiffs and Held in the defendant's reference
library. In Particular, the Plaintiffs Referred to the defendant's
custom photocopying service and its free-standing photocopiers.
The Plaintiffs Brought action for injunctive Relief Regarding the
statements and for subsistence and ownership of copyright,
infringement of copyright and in specific publications or portions of
publications in the qui Allegedly Plaintiffs owned copyrights. The
defendant counterclaimed for a declaration That copyright is not
infringed When A single copy of a Reported decision, case summary,
statute, regulation or limited selection of text from a treatise is
made by ict staff or a boss of the free-standing photocopiers for the
purpose of research. The defendant aussi Sought solicitor-andcustomer costs, and injunctive Relief.
The shares Were allowed in hand and the counterclaims Were
Dismissed. A statement Was Granted That copyright subsisted in the
Plaintiffs 'annotated statute, textbook, and monograph published as
a chapter in a textbook, and que la defendant infringed the
Plaintiffs' copyright in the textbook and the monograph by
photocopying has substantial businesses portion and by distributing
the copy. The Plaintiffs Were In Their unsuccessful claim for a