IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v23y1997i3p317-330.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When in Rome ... Amending Canada's Copyright Act

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Rushton

Abstract

Bill C-32, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act, received royal assent on 25 April 1997. This was known as "Phase II" of copyright reform, "Phase I" having been enacted in 1988. Along with a number of technical amendments, there are four substantial changes to copyright law in the bill: a clarification of exemptions for non-profit institutions such as universities and libraries; stronger rules against "parallel importation" of books; a levy on blank audio tapes, with proceeds to go to copyright collectives; and "neighbouring rights" for sound performers and their producers. There are two distinct ways of thinking about copyright law. One focuses on the natural rights of creators to the income generated by their works. The other focuses on the economic problem of designing a copyright regime which maximizes social welfare. The author suggests that while both views of copyright have been put forward in Canada throughout the debate over reform, the natural rights view had more influence on the design of Bill C-32 than the economic view.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Rushton, 1997. "When in Rome ... Amending Canada's Copyright Act," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 23(3), pages 317-330, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:23:y:1997:i:3:p:317-330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0317-0861%28199709%2923%3A3%3C317%3AWIRACC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    2. Besen, Stanley M & Kirby, Sheila Nataraj, 1989. "Private Copying, Appropriability, and Optimal Copying Royalties," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(2), pages 255-280, October.
    3. Johnson, William R, 1985. "The Economics of Copying," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(1), pages 158-174, February.
    4. Novos, Ian E & Waldman, Michael, 1984. "The Effects of Increased Copyright Protection: An Analytic Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(2), pages 236-246, April.
    5. Douglas A. Smith, 1988. "Recent Proposals for Copyright Revision: An Evaluation," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 14(2), pages 175-185, June.
    6. Hovenkamp, Herbert, 1995. "Law and Economics in the United States: A Brief Historical Survey," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(2), pages 331-352, April.
    7. Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1987. "Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 265-309, October.
    8. Koboldt, Christian, 1995. "Intellectual Property and Optimal Copyright Protection," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 95-01, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    9. Stanley M. Besen & Leo J. Raskind, 1991. "An Introduction to the Law and Economics of Intellectual Property," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 3-27, Winter.
    10. Dam, Kenneth W, 1995. "Some Economic Considerations in the Intellectual Property Protection of Software," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 321-377, June.
    11. Posner, Richard A, 1992. "When Is Parody Fair Use?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 67-78, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Rushton, 1998. "The Moral Rights of Artists: Droit Moral ou Droit Pécuniaire?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 22(1), pages 15-32, March.
    2. Michael Rushton, 1999. "Methodological Individualism and Cultural Economics," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(3), pages 137-146, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stan J. Liebowitz & Richard Watt, 2006. "How To Best Ensure Remuneration For Creators In The Market For Music? Copyright And Its Alternatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 513-545, September.
    2. Paul Belleflamme & Pierre M. Picard, 2007. "Piracy and Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 351-383, June.
    3. Mustonen, Mikko, 2003. "Copyleft--the economics of Linux and other open source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 99-121, March.
    4. Yeh-ning Chen & Ivan Png, 2003. "Information Goods Pricing and Copyright Enforcement: Welfare Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 107-123, March.
    5. Antonio Andrés & Simplice Asongu, 2013. "Fighting Software Piracy: Which Governance Tools Matter in Africa?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 667-682, December.
    6. Asongu Simplice & Antonio R. Andrés, 2012. "Fighting software piracy: which governance tools matter in Africa?," Working Papers of the African Governance and Development Institute. 12/017, African Governance and Development Institute..
    7. Jin-Hyuk Kim, 2013. "A simple model of copyright levies: implications for harmonization," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(6), pages 992-1013, December.
    8. Baker, Matthew J & Cunningham, Brendan M, 2006. "Court Decisions and Equity Markets: Estimating the Value of Copyright Protection," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 567-596, October.
    9. Ming-Fang Tsai & Jiunn-Rong Chiou, 2012. "Counterfeiting, enforcement and social welfare," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 107(1), pages 1-21, September.
    10. Sanjay Jain, 2008. "Digital Piracy: A Competitive Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 610-626, 07-08.
    11. Yoon, Kiho, 2002. "The optimal level of copyright protection," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 327-348, September.
    12. Waters, James, 2013. "Pricing information goods with piracy and heterogeneous consumers," MPRA Paper 46918, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Domon, Koji & Yamazaki, Naoto, 2004. "Unauthorized file-sharing and the pricing of digital content," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 179-184, November.
    14. Rick Harbaugh & Rahul Khemka, 2010. "Does Copyright Enforcement Encourage Piracy?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 306-323, June.
    15. Choi, Pilsik & Bae, Sang Hoo & Jun, Jongbyung, 2010. "Digital piracy and firms' strategic interactions: The effects of public copy protection and DRM similarity," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 354-364, December.
    16. Xinyu Hua & Kathryn E. Spier, 2023. "Settling Lawsuits With Pirates," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(2), pages 543-575, May.
    17. Michael Rushton, 1998. "The Moral Rights of Artists: Droit Moral ou Droit Pécuniaire?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 22(1), pages 15-32, March.
    18. Patrick Legros, 2005. "Art and the Internet: Blessing the Curse?," Levine's Bibliography 666156000000000502, UCLA Department of Economics.
    19. Kim Jin-Hyuk, 2007. "Strategic Use of Copyright Protection to Deter Entry," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, September.
    20. Yooki Park & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2004. "Digital Rights Management and the Pricing of Digital Products," Working Papers 04-09, NET Institute, revised Oct 2004.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:23:y:1997:i:3:p:317-330. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iver Chong The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Iver Chong to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.