Legal Information Database

  • Which type of creative are you?

  • Which area of the law can we help with?

  • Number of results per page

Browse articles in our database

Through the hard work of ALIS’s law student volunteers, we are always adding to our extensive database of articles for creative professionals looking for legal information. If you don’t see what you are looking for here, please get in touch via our Client Intake Form.

Found 16 Results
Page 1 of 1

Wiebe v Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science and Technology, 2007 SKQB 60 (CanLII)

Key Principle: A unionized employee, subject to the terms of a collective agreement, must go through the necessary steps of dispute resolution before applying to a court for a remedy. If the collective agreement specifically addresses matters related to the creation of works and copyright…

Tags: ,

Setana Sport Limited v 2049630 Ontario Inc (Verde Minho Tapas & Lounge), 2007 FC 899 (CanLII)

Key Principle: In order to prove copyright ownership it must be accepted as fact by the defence or proven with substantive evidence in court. Bald assertions, or simply claiming you own copyright, is not enough. Also, a corporation cannot be the “author” of a work….

Tags: ,

Ritchie v Sawmill Creek Golf & Country Ltd, 35 CPR (4th) 163 (CanLII)

Key Principle: Oral permission to use photos for a certain purpose provides a defence to an action for infringement. But, oral permission to use them for a certain purpose gives no rights in the photos with respect to suing others for copyright infringement. A grant…

Tags: , ,

Allen v Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd, [1997] OJ 4363 (CanLII)

Key Principle: The fair dealing defence is contextual, meaning it is highly dependant on the facts of an individual case. Generally, one will not be found to have infringed a copyright of an author if the reproduction of that author’s work is only a minimal…

Tags: , , , , , ,

Euro-Excellence Inc v Kraft Canada Inc, [2007] 2 SCR 20 (CanLII)

Key Principle: Generally, a distributor of material subject to copyright will not be found to have infringed that copyright if they lawfully received the material in question from the party who owns the copyright. However, if a distributor knows or should have known the party…

Tags: ,

Winkler v Roy (Kelley v Roy), 2002 FCT 950 (CanLII).

Key Principle: An owner of a copyright in a work is free to assign or license some or all of the rights associated with that copyright to another person for the entire life of the copyright, which is normally for the life of the author,…

Tags: , ,

Software Guy Brokers Ltd v Hardy, 2004 BCSC 82

Key Principle: To successfully advance a claim of passing-off, one party must show that, by its name or branding, another party has, or is likely to, deceive or mislead the public into thinking that its business is related to that of the first party. Only…

Tags: , ,

Schauenburg Industries Ltd v Borowski (1979), 25 OR (2d) 737

Key Principle: The creator of a work is presumed to hold the copyright to the work. While the unauthorized reproduction of a substantial part of a copyrighted machine drawing constitutes copyright infringement, so too may the unfair reproduction of certain important features of such a…

Tags: , ,

Rucker Co v Gavel’s Vulcanizing Ltd (1985), 7 CPR (3d) 294 (FCTD)

Key Principle: The reproduction of one element of a patented product does not typically amount to infringement of the patent. However, if it is plain that a given patent was drafted to protect a single novel element of an otherwise familiar product, a court may…


ResourceEye Services Inc v Atrum Coal Groundhog Inc, 2015 BCSC 821

Key Principle: Survey data cannot be copyrighted. Only the documents on which they are presented may be protected by copyright. As a general rule factual information cannot be owned. Once released, it may be freely used. Summary: The Situation: You run a geological survey company….

Tags: ,

International Press Ltd v Tunnell [1938] 1 DLR 393 (ONCA)

Key Principle: Generally, a description cannot be protected by trademark. However, if a descriptive word or phrase has come to be widely associated with a particular product, the producer of the product may lay claim to it. Summary: The Situation: You are a computer programmer…


Interbox Promotion Corp v 2428-0414 Quebec Inc, 2003 FC 125

Key Principle: While sporting events do not themselves qualify as works capable of attracting copyright protection, television reproductions of sporting events may. In the case of televised programming, generally both the programming itself and the communication signal by which it is transmitted is protected by…

Tags: ,

Corso v Nebs Business Products Ltd (2009), 2009 CarswellOnt 1410

Key Principle: By default, an employer owns the copyright to any patentable product that his employee produces in the course of employment. It makes no difference if the employee calls the product a personal project, or whether he initially develops it on his own time….

Tags: , ,

Asher Consultants Ltd v Walter (2000), 2000 SKQB 30

Key Principle: Unless it is made in the course of employment, the creator of a work is presumed to hold the copyright for it. Although the creator of a work may assign copyright to another party, for the assignment to be valid it must be…

Tags: , ,

Kennedy v. Ruminski, 2014 FC 526

Key Principle: Employers are automatically vested with copyright in any work employees produce during their employment, unless there is an agreement to the contrary. Where an employee’s prior work becomes commingled with work produced during employment, an employer can claim an interest in that prior…

Tags: , ,

Kroeger v. Amar II Canada Productions Inc., 2002 BCSC 1099

Key Principle: Unless there is evidence to suggest the contrary, a musician holds all copyright interest in a musical work that he or she creates and records. This interest extends to the master recording for the musical work, and as such, no other person has…

Tags: ,

Page 1 of 1