The Art of Selling Chocolate: Remarks on Copyright's Domain
On July 27, 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada released a significant decision dealing with copyright and parallel imports, Euro-Excellence Inc. v. Kraft Canada Inc. [Euro-Excellence]. This paper frames Euro-Excellence in light of (a) the evolving roles in Supreme Court of Canada copyright jurisprudence of the concepts of "balance," "reproduction," and "user rights" in the copyright system, and (b) the distinctions between copyright, patent and trade-mark as autonomous yet related legal regimes. More specifically, the paper analyzes Bastarache J.'s judgment in Euro-Excellence in order to tease out the ways in which the concept of copyright's own specific domain - as distinct from that of other modes of intellectual property protection - interacts with that of copyright's purpose, and to speculate about the implications that this interaction holds for our understanding of copyright subject-matter and copyright infringement. The upshot of the discussion is a distinction between "patterns of ink" and "works of authorship" affirming and developing the familiar proposition - contained in the defense of independent creation and the defense of fair dealing - that the mere physical identity of patterns of ink in the plaintiff's and the defendant's respective works need not give rise to copyright liability. Physical identities are not by that token alone infringing copies.
The Right of Exclusive Access: Misusing Copyright to Expand the Patent Monopoly
Copyright legislation has been amended in many countries to provide legal protection to access- and use-controlling technology. Canada is considering similar provisions in Bill C-60. This article examines the policy issues that arise when copyright law, in conjunction with anticircumvention technology, is invoked to provide concurrent protection for a patented or patentable device. It discusses the philosophical justification for IP rights protection, including the notion of balancing owner and user interests, and the importance of respecting the different balances on which each intellectual property right lies. The article argues that technology, with its legal protection, can be used to expand the patent monopoly, or even supplant it, effectively eliminating the concept of intellectual property rights' balance. The article identifies and analyses the effects of access- and use-controlling technology on the patent monopoly and, drawing on the experience of other jurisdictions with similar provisions, offers two suggestions to mitigate the risk that the inclusion of anticircumvention provisions in the Copyright Act can be misused to expand the patent monopoly. One recommendation is to change the proposed provisions in Bill C-60 to connect the circumvention of DRM technology with actual copyright infringement and to narrow down the definition of access-controlling technology. The second suggestion is to introduce into Canadian copyright law a statutory cause of action, or defence, similar to the American equitable defence of copyright misuse, which could be invoked to address the improper use of any copyright rights.
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice ten years on: Successes and future challenges under the Stockholm Programme. CEPS Paperbacks. June 2010
This book celebrates the tenth anniversary of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) by bringing together the views of key practitioners and policy-makers who have played an outstanding role in thinking about and shaping EU policies on freedom, security and justice. 
 
Ten years ago, the member states transferred competences to the EU for law and policy-making in the fields of immigration, asylum and border controls, and began the transfer process for criminal justice and policing. This decade of European cooperation on AFSJ policies has experienced very dynamic convergence, the enactment of a large body of European law and the setting-up of numerous EU agencies working in these domains. Such dynamism in policy-making has not been without challenges and vulnerabilities, however. As this collective volume shows, the main dilemmas that lie ahead relate to an effective (while more plural) institutional framework under the Treaty of Lisbon, stronger judicial scrutiny through a greater role for national courts and the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, better mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of EU AFSJ law and a more solid fundamental rights strategy. The contributions in this volume address the progress achieved so far in these policy areas, identify the challenges for future European cooperation in the AFSJ and put forward possible paths for making more progress in the next generation of the EU’s AFSJ.