In Defence of a Defence - A Demonstrable Legitimate and Non-Infringing Purpose as a Full Defence to Anti-Circumvention Legislation
Vol: 10, Issue: 1
2012
- 67Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage67
- Downloads47
- Abstract Views20
Article Description
In this essay, I will argue that making a demonstrable lawful and non-infringing purpose a full defence to copyright infringement by circumvention of a TPM addresses many of the concerns raised by the currently proposed legislation, while avoiding the pitfalls of directly linking anti-circumvention laws with actual copyright infringement. As the ratification of the WIPO Internet treaties is the foremost concern for this legislation, I will begin with a discussion as to how this model can successfully implement the treaties’ anti-circumvention provisions where the Bill C-60 model may have failed. I will then explain why this model strikes a better balance between the rights of copyright holders and the legitimate interests of users. To do this, I will discuss the implications for fair dealing, addressing how the currently proposed provisions interfere with the fair dealing exceptions found in the Copyright Act while this model does not, as well as the more general issue of whether TPMs are capable of interfering with fair dealing at all. I will also address this model’s implications for the new user exceptions in Bill C-32: in particular how this model negates the need for the TPM exemptions to these exceptions currently found at s. 29.22(1)(c), s. 29.23(1)(b), and s. 29.24(1)(c), and why that is a preferable outcome.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know