Title: Alberta (Education) v. Access Copyright

Learning Objectives:

- Recount the circumstances and outcome of Alberta Eduation v. Access Copyright
- Identify the more significant factors in the fair dealing analysis that contributed to the decision
- Outline the main issues from the dissent in the case

What about the "Nature of the work?"
Although “the nature of the work” is one of the six factors for determining fairness that were identified in the CCH case, not every factor will be relevant to every determination of fairness.  The “nature of the work” factor was not discussed in this case.

Q: The Alberta (Education) decision confirms that, under fair dealing, Sam can lawfully reproduce an entire book if it is for the purpose of instruction.
A: false

Q: In this case the teachers were making copies:
- Of short excerpts (correct)
- Of entire texts
- Of relevant book chapters

Q: The “amount” factor of the six-factor test refers to the amount of copies made.
A: false

Q: For the “alternatives to the dealing” factor of the six-factor test the Supreme Court found that buying books for each student was:
- Not a realistic alternative to copying short excerpts (correct)
- A realistic alternative to photocopying a textbook
- A realistic alternative to copying short excerpts
- Not necessary because students already had a textbook

For the “purpose of the dealing” factor of the six-factor test, the Supreme Court and the Copyright Board interpreted “private study” in different ways. Provide the source for each interpretation. (Options: "Supreme Court" or "Copyright Board")

Q: The [...] interpreted “private study” as something that is done in private that does not apply to teachers photocopying materials for instruction.
A: Copyright Board
Q: The [...] interpreted “private study” as something that can be done with others or in isolation. Instruction in the school context is effectively the same as private study and thus using excerpts of materials for instruction should be considered fair dealing.
A: Supreme Court

Q: The Supreme Court’s ruling that the Copyright Board’s earlier decision did not meet the “reasonableness” standard, was reached because five of the nine judges believed the previous decision was based on a misapplication of the CCH six-factors.
A: true

Q: The standard of review for the Court to apply to the decision of the Copyright Board is:
- “Reasonableness:” whether the decision is reasonable (correct)
- “Correctness:” whether the decision is correct

Choose the correct statement.

Credits: Alberta (Education) v. Access Copyright; by University of Alberta; 2019; source https://youtu.be/26CAtjZD9MQ; licence CC BY 4.0