Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
1Activity

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
01 AUCCs Memorandum of Fact and Law (January 30, 2012)

01 AUCCs Memorandum of Fact and Law (January 30, 2012)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 3 |Likes:
Published by hknopf

More info:

Published by: hknopf on Mar 23, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/30/2014

pdf

text

original

 
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
BETWEEN:File Nos. A-339
-11
A-395
-11
ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITIES
AND
COLLEGES
OF
CANADAand
THE
UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA
Applicants-
and-
THE
CANADIAN COPYRIGHT LICENSING AGENCYOperating as "ACCESS COPYRIGHT"MEMORANDUM OF FACT
AND
LAWOF
THE
APPLICANTS
RespondentDate: January 30, 2012
LEGAL_l:226S1950.1
Osler, Hoskin
&
Harcourt
LLP
1900 -340 Albert StreetOttawa, Ontario
KlR
7Y6Tel: (613) 235-7234Fax: (613) 235-2867Glen
A.
BloomPatricia WilsonSolicitors for the Applicants,Association
of
Universities andColleges
of
Canada and TheUniversity
of
Manitoba1455
 
1456
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
I OVERVIEW
&
STATEMENT
OF
FACTS
.............................................. 1OVERVIEW .............................................................................................. 1Introduction and Backgronnd
of
Proceedings ................................ IOpt-Out Interrogatories Decision .................................................. 4Transactional Licences Decision ................................................... 6STATEMENT
OF
FACTS
........................................................................ 8The Applicants ............................................................................... 8
The
Respondent ............................................................................. 9Prior Licensing Arrangements -Between Access Copyright
and AUCC
Members ........................................................
10
Alternative Copying Permissions Options Available
to
Institutions ........................................................................
12
Access Copyright Interrogatory Proceedings ..............................
15
Transactional Licence Decision Proceedings ..............................
19
II
STATEMENT
OF
ISSUES .....................................................................
21
III ARGUMENT ...........................................................................................
23
STANDARD
OF
REVIEW .....................................................................
23
DECISIONS
ARE
FINAL DETERMINATIONS MERITINGREVIEW ......................................................................................
23
OPT-OUT INTERROGATORIES DECISION .......................................
25
The Board Does Not
Have
the Authority under Sections66.7(1) and
70.15
of
the
Act
to
Order the Opt-OutInstitutions
to
Provide Responses
to
Interrogatories .......
25
Board Failed
to
Consider Whether the Opt-OutInterrogatories Order was Necessary or Proper ...............
29
The Board Failed
to
Consider Whether the Requirements
for
Non-Party Discovery
were
Met..
................................
30
Extensive Nature and Lack
of
Proportion
of
theInterrogatories ..................................................................
32
Improper Enforcement Threats
and
Prospective EvidentiaryRulings .............................................................................
33
Opt-Out Interrogatories Decision
is
Unreasonable ......................
35
Transactional Licences Decision .............................................................
36
Inconsistent with Statutory Context
and
Purpose
of
Copying Licensing Provisions .........................................
36
LEGAL_I:22681950.1
 
1457Monitoring and Volume Detennination
of
the Board wereMisplaced ......................................................................... 39
The
Board Misapprehended the Purposes
ofInterim
Ordersunder Section 66.51
of
the
Act
........................................ 40Inconsistency with Earlier Decisions ...........................................
41
Transactional Licences Decision is Unreasonable ....................... 42Conclusion ...............................................................................................
43
IV ORDERS SOUGHT ................................................................................
43
V AUTHORITIES REFERRED TO ........................................................... 46
LEGAL_l:22681950, I

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->