Canada: Copyright

The Delhi High Court has issued a preliminary ruling on whether AI training on copyrighted content constitutes infringement, distinguishing between the ingestion of works for model training and the generation of outputs. The decision addresses jurisdictional questions, fair dealing analysis, and the technical architecture of AI systems, offering guidance on how courts may evaluate copyright claims against large language models. While significant, this interlocutory ruling leaves several legal questions unre

The Federal Court has issued a landmark ruling on stream ripping services that circumvent YouTube's security measures to create permanent downloads of content meant only for streaming.

A Federal Court decision highlights the critical importance of intellectual property clauses in consulting agreements, demonstrating how companies can face substantial statutory damages when they continue using copyrighted works after breaching payment terms with independent contractors. The case examines whether ongoing use of educational materials constitutes copyright infringement when no IP transfer was documented in the original contract.

From April 7–11, 2026, the internationally renowned Patent Cup took place in Vancouver, bringing together patent professionals from around the world for a unique blend of competitive sailing and industry camaraderie.

Canada's new AI strategy commits $2 billion to drive adoption and economic growth, yet leaves a critical question unanswered: how should copyright law apply to generative AI systems trained on protected content? With creators demanding licensing requirements and tech companies warning against innovation barriers, the government's silence means Canadian courts may ultimately decide the balance between intellectual property rights and AI development.

Le Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) américain offre un mécanisme de retrait rapide de contenus en ligne, mais son utilisation peut avoir des conséquences qui dépassent la simple protection du droit d'auteur. L'affaire Stephen Colbert illustre comment une demande de retrait juridiquement défendable peut devenir un outil de gestion de contenu tout en créant des risques réputationnels importants lorsqu'elle est perçue comme une tentative de contrôle narratif.

In Hellboy Productions, Inc. v. Doe #1,1 the Federal Court granted the second attempt by Hellboy Productions Inc. (the Plaintiff) at a motion for a Norwich order, requiring a non-party Internet Service Provider (ISP) to identify the owners of IP addresses used to share the Plaintiff’s film online. The decision is a helpful reminder of the evidentiary requirements on a motion for a Norwich order.

Le 25 mars 2026, la Cour suprême des États-Unis a rendu sa décision dans Cox Communications, Inc. et al. v. Sony Music Entertainment et al., 607 U.S. ------- S.Ct. ----2026 WL 815823 limitant les circonstances dans lesquelles les fournisseurs de services Internet (FSI) peuvent être tenus responsables des violations du droit d'auteur commises par les utilisateurs de leurs services.

The Respondent insurer had retained a psychologist to conduct an insurer examination of the Applicant. While the Respondent produced some records from the psychologist’s office...