Through our many other events, the IP Innovation Clinic and the IPilogue, IP Osgoode seeks to empower and give a voice to marginalized and underrepresented communities. Check out some of our recent IPilogue articles relevant to this cause:

Over the past week, we asked women in various roles and at all levels across IP law, business and technology to talk about their experiences getting to where they are, the prejudices they have encountered, and the ways in which they actively promote other women in their fields. With this piece, we hope to fuel the movement to enable all women an equal opportunity to succeed in their personal and professional endeavours.

Name a woman who inspires you professionally and describe how she has helped you to succeed:

“My mother was an early feminist and she encouraged my sister and I to be financially independent, working women. This has encouraged me to stick with my career as a lawyer, despite the challenges of trying to balance a family with a very taxing profession.”

 -Paula Clancy, Managing Attorney at Clancy PC

“Dr. Riffat Raana (mother) - her grit, dedication to work, independence, perseverance and initiative have been a source of constant inspiration for me.”

-Emma Abbas, Student-at-Law at IP Osgoode

“Andrea Rush, she is a senior partner at Blaney McMurtry, and passed the IP Year in Review Chair role to me which helped raise my profile.”

-May Cheng, Partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

“Professor D'Agostino - she is always thinking differently and challenging the norm. With a smile!”

-Anonymous

“Amy-Lynne Williams; she has taken the time to mentor, teach, champion causes I care about, encourage me to follow my own path, and demonstrate how to balance work and life priorities.”

-Jennifer Davidson, IP and Technology Lawyer at Deeth Williams Wall LLP

“Professor Giuseppina (Pina) D'Agostino: Since I joined IP Osgoode in the first year of my studies, I have been given many amazing opportunities by Professor D'Agostino to explore the fields of IP, business, and technology law. The diverse set of opportunities that IP Osgoode, led by Professor D'Agostino, offers to students to put their theoretical understanding of IP law to practice has helped me get a well-rounded view of what practicing IP law looks like. Additionally, the example that she sets for students in leadership, and the encouragement and support that she provides has helped me a lot in my law school journey.”

-Bonnie Hassanzadeh, 2L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School

“ was a smiling dynamic life force and I was fortunate to have her as my mentor. She recruited me to Stikeman Elliott as a summer student and from our very first meeting she took me under her wing as her mentee and guided me in formative early career decisions. She encouraged me to always aim high and pursue my doctorate at the University of Oxford, even though that would mean me leaving the firm. She was proud of me and often told me so. One of the busiest women I knew with a thriving practice heading the firm’s Technology and Outsourcing group, yet she always cleared her calendar whenever I would visit her. She championed women and was one of the first to see technology law as an emerging area of practice back in 1980s. A genuine trailblazer in every respect, and most especially for young women, she died on the very day honouring women, International Women’s Day. Her legacy lives on in her kids, and in the many women she touched, including me.”

-Prof Pina D’Agostino, Founder & Director of IP Osgoode, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, �첥��Ƶ

What is the biggest challenge that you have faced getting to where you are today? How did you overcome it?

“The biggest challenge I faced was taking maternity leaves for my children. I was eventually taken off the partnership track and destined to be a perpetual associate until I took matters into my hands and launched my own firm.”

-Paula Clancy, Managing Attorney at Clancy PC

“Moving countries twice, each time I had to start over. I can't 'overcome' time, but it has made me incredibly versatile, empathetic and able to pivot and reinvent myself in a new situation. I've learnt from my past and I look towards the future excited to discover more aspects of myself.”

-Emma Abbas, Student-at-Law at IP Osgoode

“Recognition and advancement were denied based on perceptions and stereotypes rather than performance. I had to move jobs to be recognized by a more progressive firm.”

-May Cheng, Partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

“Being too conservative about taking on new challenges. Remembering that every time you try something new you learn and grow. If someone else can do it, so can you.”

-Anonymous

“Balance. It’s an ongoing challenge to balance an energetic, young family and a demanding, young career. I’m not sure this is something one can overcome, but one can learn to manage the competing priorities.”

-Jennifer Davidson, IP and Technology Lawyer at Deeth Williams Wall LLP

“Adjusting to the pace and demands of law school courses was very challenging for me in the beginning. As a student who comes from a science background, writing long papers and exams in law school did not feel natural to me. Learning takes patience and time and in the past year and a half I have learned to be more patient with myself. I think finding an area of the law that I genuinely enjoy learning about has helped me in my adjustment process. Additionally, focusing on my strengths and getting involved with extracurriculars has helped boost my confidence and belief in myself.”

-Bonnie Hassanzadeh, 2L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School

“I feel as though I have faced many challenges, and still continue to. Perhaps my biggest one is my immigrant background which did not provide me with the privileges that many of my law school peers enjoyed. Born in Canada, I moved to Italy at an early age, and only returned to not speak a word of English and had to work my way up from being at the bottom of the class. I was the first in my family to go to university. I excelled with many all nighters and determination and the most treasured love and support from my parents, who have taught me life’s most important lessons. My family is my rock.”

-Prof Pina D’Agostino, Founder & Director of IP Osgoode, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, �첥��Ƶ

What negative attitudes have you personally witnessed that need to stop in order to promote the advancement of women in your profession?

“I've been told that I'm "soft-spoken" by quite a few men. I've been told this in multiple situations, from being in a negotiation setting to speaking with a parking attendant. I think it's fairly common for men to make this kind of unsolicited comment about young women, and it connotes a lack of power or confidence, especially in a professional setting. But what is important is that I don't see myself this way.

While I definitely try to communicate in a way that leaves room for others to contribute or even disagree, I know that when I speak about something with conviction, my point of view is clear.

Being comfortable with my "soft-spoken" self has allowed me to (for the most part) take these comments in stride. I see the benefit of the way I communicate through interactions with clients and through collaborative work with other students or lawyers. I may not be loud or overbearing when I speak, but I know that I am a wonderful teammate, and one day will make a great leader, BECAUSE of my ability to listen and to leave room for others in the way I communicate. I hope that I get less of these comments going forward, and that men who may have had the urge to tell me that I'm "soft-spoken" in the past start to appreciate the benefits of different ways of communicating.”

-Rachel Marcus, 3L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School, Senior Clinic Fellow at IP Osgoode IP Innovation Clinic

“I believe maternity leave poses the biggest challenge for women in law. While wonderful on a personal level and essential on a societal level, maternity leave and childcare has the effect of sidetracking women. Law is a time-based profession so time away from work inevitably interferes with aspirations for partnership, leadership positions, salary, etc., and negative attitudes regarding taking such time needs to stop. The reality is that women still take on the lion's share of child and home care responsibilities. By making paternity leave mandatory for men, I believe this would level the playing field.”

-Paula Clancy, Managing Attorney at Clancy PC

“Career women do not feel secure having children. There is not enough support for single mothers, for new mothers or career women who have worked hard for years to get to where they are. They are pitched back a decade in career progression for maternity leave. Not enough men speak out about women issues. Not enough men are willing to hold out a supporting hand to bring equality in the true sense. Women who work night shifts and have infants have no childcare support.”

-Emma Abbas, Student-at-Law at IP Osgoode

“Women tearing down other women, and not speaking up or standing up for other women, in order to be accepted by the boys club as the token women. These are the ones that Madeleine Albright said deserve a special place in hell.”

-May Cheng, Partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

“That you can't balance family and work. That you have to work all the time.”

-Anonymous

“There is an ongoing underlying belief that women cannot compete in the same league as men in the tech arena. I see it regularly in negotiations with older practitioners. Our job is to continue to knock that down at every opportunity.”

-Jennifer Davidson, IP and Technology Lawyer at Deeth Williams Wall LLP

“I think the notion that there are limited seats at the table available to women and that women have to compete with one another for opportunities is a particularly negative attitude. Scarcity of opportunities available to women in the legal field is a systemic issue that needs to be addressed. However, pitting women against one another in an already competitive environment is something that needs to stop in order to promote the advancement of women in the legal field.”

-Bonnie Hassanzadeh, 2L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School

“There needs to be more understanding of women’s unique challenges. We are tireless and try and balance it all and always face the brunt of crises, more than our male counterparts do. Our current pandemic is a case in point.”

-Prof Pina D’Agostino, Founder & Director of IP Osgoode, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, �첥��Ƶ

What is the next glass ceiling to shatter in achieving gender parity in intellectual property law, business, or technology?

“Mandatory paternity leave for fathers.”

-Paula Clancy, Managing Attorney at Clancy PC

“Initiatives at the government, corporate and individual level to level the playing field for women. To give the kind of financial or child support that career women need to succeed. This could be on-site child-care facilities, flexible work options, remote work, night/day-care coverage.”

-Emma Abbas, Student-at-Law at IP Osgoode

“There are more Andrews than women in the top IP litigator list. That says it all! Women are not recommended as IP litigators nearly as often. There is a horrible stereotype there.”

-May Cheng, Partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

“To recognize the advantage of different kinds of leadership and diverse opinions.”

-Anonymous

“More women in equity partner roles within firms. It is sad to see that ratio numbers are so low.”

-Jennifer Davidson, IP and Technology Lawyer at Deeth Williams Wall LLP

“More representation of women of colour, especially Indigenous women needs to be seen in the fields of business, technology, and IP law. Despite the efforts to promote diversity and inclusion, the legal field continues to lack adequate representation of women of colour and Indigenous communities. The barriers that these communities face in entering the fields of business, technology, and IP law have to be addressed from the early stages of education in order for this glass ceiling to shatter.”

-Bonnie Hassanzadeh, 2L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School

“There are many ceilings to shatter still. Increasing representation of women as they advance up the echelons of power is a must. We now have more than half the incoming law school class comprised of women, yet more women still need to be seen as we rise up the profession, and be properly compensated for it. We still make less than our male counterparts and we should not stand for this, not even men. We need more female entrepreneurs to start up and scale up, more women in boards and in leading decision-making roles. Lots more to be done for gender parity.”

-Prof Pina D’Agostino, Founder & Director of IP Osgoode, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, �첥��Ƶ

How do you work to empower women who wish to be where you are today?

“I run a women-based firm. I encourage women to continue to learn and seek professional designations (such as Certified Trademark Administrator, Certified Patent Administrator, Registered Trademark Agent). I also understand that women take on the lion's share of child care and home care responsibilities so I try to be as flexible as possible to encourage a balance.”

-Paula Clancy, Managing Attorney at Clancy PC

“Provide feedback, give recommendations, moral support, mentoring where possible.”

-Emma Abbas, Student-at-Law at IP Osgoode

“Mentoring, training, coaching and sponsoring. Setting an example and paving a way forward. Not giving up on the fight.”

-May Cheng, Partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

“Always open to meet, be positive, challenge old measures of success.”

-Anonymous

“Mentoring! New lawyers need to see it to be it!”

-Jennifer Davidson, IP and Technology Lawyer at Deeth Williams Wall LLP

“I help support 1Ls through the Osgoode Women's Network Mentorship Program. I connect students in their first year of studies with helpful resources and lend moral support when they need it.”

-Bonnie Hassanzadeh, 2L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School

“I am blessed to work in education, in the university at the front lines of female empowerment. I aim to increase access, nurture, mentor young female talent to excel. I always think back to how hard it has been and continues to be for me and wish to spare other women from being similarly placed. My goal is to advise, empower my female students through their education and create opportunities for their advancement to find their own unique career happiness.

In particular at IP Osgoode, from the outset, I have spearheaded many initiatives to empower women: from the type of events we hold for the wider community of women, the students we train to the female start ups we help. Empowering women will no doubt continue to preoccupy me (and inspire me!) in the many years ahead.”

-Prof Pina D’Agostino, Founder & Director of IP Osgoode, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, �첥��Ƶ

What advice would you give to women and allies alike who want to help further women's professional advancement?

“I would say be flexible - sometimes women can be hard on other women. We need to support each other and raise each other up. We need a "team" mentality.”

-Paula Clancy, Managing Attorney at Clancy PC

“Be willing to give of your resources- time, money, opportunity, moral support without judgment.”

-Emma Abbas, Student-at-Law at IP Osgoode

“Be a sponsor, mentor, advocate and coach to young women in the IP profession. We all need a helping hand.”

-May Cheng, Partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

“Support other women.”

-Anonymous

“Take the time to mentor, support and champion new lawyers (particularly women) at every opportunity. Let them know when they have done a great job and if they make mistakes, show them how to improve! Take them out to lunch or have a Zoom coffee to discuss their career goals and lift them up where the opportunity exists.”

-Jennifer Davidson, IP and Technology Lawyer at Deeth Williams Wall LLP

“I think the first step to helping is listening. In order for allies and women in positions of power to be able to help, they need to listen to the needs and concerns of different communities and direct their resources accordingly. I also believe giving women of diverse backgrounds and perspectives opportunities to be in the "decision-making rooms" is vital to making genuine progress in advancement of all women in the legal field.”

-Bonnie Hassanzadeh, 2L Student at Osgoode Hall Law School

“Listen to one another, lift each other up and work together, not against each other.”

-Prof Pina D’Agostino, Founder & Director of IP Osgoode, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, �첥��Ƶ

 Written by Ashley Moniz, Lawyer, and Assistant Director of IP Osgoode

The post Celebrating Every Woman on International Women’s Day appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Due to the international and extra-jurisdictional aspects of enforcing and administrating patent law in general, and similarities between Canadian and European patent regimes, the concerns and issues raised in her are relevant in Canada and could trigger similar discussions regarding the Canadian patent system.

Patent law and Language

Is there anything inherent in patent law that makes it more susceptible to ambiguities than other fields of law? Dr. Thambisetty posits that patent law works as an intermediary between law and other fields of knowledge, such as science and commerce, which have their own dialects and languages. One can think of patent law as an interdisciplinary field, whose dialect is the common denominator of many mutually exclusive technical languages. This interaction leads to the creation of non-standard terms in patent law. Further, due to this unique position of patent law, the scale of non-standard terms that are used in this field is considerably larger than any other field of law.

Guidelines on Writing Patent Applications and Expectations��

The are written by one branch of the (“EPO”) to aid the EPO in its examining role. Guidelines are often used and quoted in the EPO’s . But they are not considered to be law and therefore are not binding. The EPO follows the guidelines in its decisions, however, it can also refrain from following them, on the basis that guidelines do not constitute law.

While the guidelines are not legally binding, patent applicants are expected to follow them in drafting their applications, and as a consequence, there is an expectation imposed on the applicant by the EPO.�� How does the EPO justify this inspirational role of its non-binding guidelines? According to Dr. Thambisetty, the EPO's institutional power over the��administration of patent law enables them to evade justifying their decisions.

Purpose of Ambiguity: Illusion of Legitimacy

One important role that ambiguity plays is that it adds to the legitimacy of the institution. Dr. Thambisetty argues that ambiguity is like an "endowment" to the office to give it legitimacy. The EPO, by exercising their power over rhetoric and language of the legislation, has kept the provisions ambiguous to give the appearance that special knowledge and expertise is required when dealing with the legislation.�� According to Dr. Thambisetty, this appearance serves two important and intertwined purposes which when combined, gives the institution the illusion of legitimacy.

First, it gives the EPO authority to exercise a relatively unlimited power over applicants and agents. This provides a possible answer as to why the EPO can impose expectations and not abide by them itself.

Second, it solidifies the EPO's position amongst other governmental institutions.��No other governmental institution can compete with the EPO, as they lack sufficient expertise and knowledge when dealing with patent legislation.��Therefore the EPO faces no competition in the regulatory sphere.

Dr. Thambisetty concluded her talk by emphasizing that an institution, which navigates ambiguity, can exercise a great deal of power over those who come within its jurisdiction. As long as this power can be enforced and harnessed, that institution��has an incentive to continue its ways. In her opinion the change has to come from inside the institution.�� So the question is, how much ambiguity are we willing to accept?

Nazli Jelveh is an IPilogue Editor and a JD candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

The post Examining Ambiguities in Patent Examination Guidelines by Dr. Siva Thambisetty appeared first on IPOsgoode.

As a member of both IPOsgoode and the , Professor is well placed to explain why it is not. She recently presented "A Feminist Copyright Agenda: Open Access, Attribution, and the Academy" as part of the Greenberg Speakers Series. Her presentation was based on her paper with Joseph Turcotte and Rosemary Coombe in the open access journal ,

Feminist Legal Theory, she noted, involves looking at laws and legal systems and understanding how and why they reinforce patriarchal power structures. Those problems stretch beyond obvious areas like Criminal and Family law and into all the reaches of the law. IP law is no exception. If this is the information age, information might be the most important source of power. Copyright is how we protect that power.

Prof. Craig went on to talk about the relative invisibility of copyright in our daily lives. We interact with copyright-protected material constantly in our work, in our research and study, in our downtime when we're binge-watching Netflix. But we rarely think about the laws and licensing details that dictate what information we can have, when we can have it, and how much we are going to pay for it.

The key question she raised was, under current copyright law, whose speech are we encouraging and whose speech are we devaluing?

She looked at the question through the lens of academic publishing, calling out the problems with the current closed-journal model in which men are more likely to get their work published and to have that work cited and thus have more work published; in which access to research results is restricted to those who are affiliated with institutions who can afford the steep price tag of journal subscriptions; in which treating the written word as individual property ignores the reality that academic work is not produced in isolation but builds on shared ideas and shared relationships.

She advocated for an open access model of publishing, not as a final solution to the problem of copyright and the reinforcement of traditional power structures, but as a step in the right direction. Using tools like and licences, feminists can turn the legal force of property ownership against itself in a kind of copyright karate. The same right to control your own work that is normally used to lock up research can be used to set it free.

This is a distinctly feminist approach, she argued, because the emphasis on sharing and attribution in open licences reflects the feminist relationship-centered view of creativity and knowledge sharing. It de-privileges the market-driven perspective and can reduce exclusion and gatekeeping.

Prof. Craig did not ignore the reality that open access publishing may also be used to reinforce existing power structures. She repeated some of the criticisms of the movement: that sharing women's work freely may simply be devaluing it; that the costs associated with open access publishing mean it is still only available to those with institutional support; that the increasing emphasis on collecting data about views and citations might reinforce existing power structures.

While she acknowledged that these problems are real, Prof. Craig contends that they can be overcome if feminist scholars develop deliberate, thoughtful practices around citation and amplification of women's voices. They must continually question whose voices they are hearing and sharing and strive to diversity those relationships. They must reconsider who and what is considered authoritative. By applying these feminist principles in their interactions with academia, feminist scholars can reshape academic strictures into structures that support and engage their female peers.

It may not be an easy fight, but it certainly seems like a fight worth fighting.

Jacquilynne Schlesier is an IPilogue Editor and a JD candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

The post Feminist Copyright is Not a Non Sequitur appeared first on IPOsgoode.

A full Federal Circuit hearing for October 2015 to hear oral arguments.

The provision the courts are referring to is , which prohibits registrations of marks that are scandalous or immoral. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) uses a two-prong test to test if a mark is disparaging. First it examines what the likely meaning of the mark is. Then it determines if that meaning refers to an identifiable group and whether it is disparaging to a substantial composite of that group.

The Lanham Act has allowed for the definition of scandalous, immoral or disparaging trademarks to be left up for debate. However, the statute is not unconstitutionally vague: .

The reopening of The Slants’ case has ignited debate regarding how far governments can go in restricting an individual’s’ right to free speech with regards to trademarks. How the courts proceed in this case will have far reaching implications for the future and could result in a fundamental change of practice regarding the treatment of disparaging marks.

The band for a trademark in 2010�� in their explanation of why “The Slants” is derogatory. Originally, the group’s lead singer Simon Tam said the band’s name was not a reference to it’s members’ Asian-American ethnicity, but rather to musical chords. In with TIME magazine, Tam argued that naming the band "The Slants" was reclaiming the word from any derogatory meaning.

As a part of the defense’s argument, Tam’s lawyers ��conducted by professors from Illinois’ North Central College and New �첥��Ƶ which��polled members of the Asian/Pacific Islander community. This survey was done in support of Tam’s trademark registration and in it the statement “I find the name of the group The Slants to be disparaging” was posed. 16 percent of participants agreed with the statement��while 46 percent disagreed��(the remaining 38 percent��stated they neither agreed nor disagreed). When participants were asked��to answer the question under the presumption that��membership��of the band was exclusively Asian-American, a majority of respondents agreed��they did not think��the name is��disparaging.

to refuse a trademark registration writing in her ruling that “The Slants would be perceived as offensive by a substantial fraction of Asians”.

However, ��Justice Moore attacked a precedential 1981 ruling which allows individuals the right to use their mark despite PTO’s refusal to register it. ��there were constitutional reasons to re-examine whether PTO should refuse disparaging marks and arguably harm free speech. This “additional views” section holds no legal weight, but points to a possible shift in the courts’ opinions on disparaging marks.

With the possibility for a shift in the way the U.S. deals with disparaging trademarks, over whether��this could change rulings of��similar cases, including the Washington Redskins' trademark dispute. Earlier this month a by the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board cancelling the team's trademark registrations after its��name was deemed disparaging to Native Americans. However, until this new��Federal Circuit hearing��has taken place, the influence The Slants' case��will have is still unclear.

Would The Slants’ fate be any different if they had registered their trademark in Canada? Unlike American law, which allows applicants to continue using their mark even if it is rejected by the trademark office, .

Setting the benchmark for what is perceived as offensive “by a substantial fraction of an identifiable group” is difficult in countries as diverse as the United States and Canada. Of course there are instances where it is obvious whether a term or word is offensive to the majority of a group. However, there are many situations where it is not quite as��clear.

As both countries continue to become more diverse, the idea of what is offensive and what is not will blur even further. This raises the question of whether governments should still tightly oversee whether a mark is disparaging. The time and place for governments to closely dictate what is offensive may no longer be needed. In today’s world, individuals turn to online channels to express their disdain for something they deem offensive or rally the masses to boycott a company and/or product. Could the same not work for trademarks? Sure, we can grant a person protection to their mark but it is only useful if individuals are willing to buy goods or services bearing that mark. As Moore J suggested, maybe it is time we re-examine the extent to which a government has the ability to refuse a mark and allow the citizens themselves to decide whether it is truly offensive.

Samantha Sim��is an��IPilogue Editor and��a graduate of Ryerson University's School of Journalism.

The post New Developments in Trademark Dispute of Asian-American Rock Band "The Slants" Reignite Free Speech Debate appeared first on IPOsgoode.

In May of 2010, the Government of Canada launched a nation-wide consultation to gather ideas for moving Canada forward in the ever-evolving digital environment. It has now been over three years since this consultation and the implementation of these recommendations has yet to occur. As recently as 28 August 2012, then-Industry that he would “launch a Canadian-made digital economy strategy by the end of the year.”

As 2013 draws to a close Canadians as well as foreign investors interested in accessing and contributing to the Canadian market continue to wait.

Crafting a comprehensive strategy for capitalizing on the promises offered by digital technologies and network connectivity is a difficult task. This broad area overlaps a number of related and divergent areas including telecommunications, broadcasting, cultural heritage, international trade as well as various industry and economic concerns. However, a strategy for coordinating digital activities across these various areas is an important step for signalling to Canadians and the world that the country is looking and planning for the economic realities of the future.

Measuring and demonstrating direct causation between digital technologies and growth remains a��. However, international organizations and market analysts are increasingly recognizing the importance of the Internet and digital media for economic and human development. The (OECD) has that we “should expect that in the long term, the development of the Internet boosts knowledge creation and enhances per capita income growth across the economy” (p. 23).

Similarly, in their 2011 “Internet matters: The Net's sweeping impact on growth, jobs, and prosperity”, the found that the Internet’s worldwide economic impact, in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), is (p. 2). The report finds that over the past five years the Internet has contributed to 21% of GDP in ‘mature’ countries and places Canada at the average level (10%) for domestic contributions to GDP (p. 16).

Countries, albeit those with larger overall economies, that have already developed strategies to benefit from digital activities — such as the United States and the United Kingdom (where the Internet contributes 15% and 23% to their GDPs, respectively) — are doing comparatively better at capturing growth advantages. However, the McKinsey Global Institute also noted that Canada has a great deal of Internet usage that can be leveraged to increase the country’s presence and benefits in the global supply ecosystem (p. 4). Formalizing a Canadian Digital Economy Strategy will assist in this respect.

Despite its absence from the recent Speech from the Throne, I think there is room for optimism about the future of Canada’s Digital Economy Strategy. This past summer and named the as the new Minister of Industry. Minister Moore is widely regarded as one of the Governments most effective communicators and skilled operatives at moving policy forward. In his previous position as the , Moore helped move the country’s long-awaited reforms to the forward.

Doing the same thing with the Digital Economy Strategy may prove just as challenging. The five areas during the consultation process—‘Capacity to Innovate Using Digital Technologies’, ‘Building a World-Class Digital Infrastructure’, ‘Growing the Information and Communications Technology Industry’, ‘Digital Media: Creating Canada's Digital Content Advantage’, ‘Building Digital Skills for Tomorrow’—are diverse and cut across a number of industries, policy areas and government departments.

Calibrating these economic, innovation, cultural, heritage, social, and intellectual property (IP) concerns will take political skill and the resolve to advance policy-oriented solutions. In my opinion, one of these areas will be comparatively easy, as Canada’s IP policies are largely set for the foreseeable future. The and Bill C-8 (previously known as Bill C-56),�� the '', purportedly aims to align Canada’s laws and priorities with its international trading partners. (Past IPilogue coverage on Bill C-8/C-56 can be found and .) A Canadian Digital Economy Strategy will need to take these priorities into account and position the country’s industries and citizens to take advantage of digital opportunities.

The intersection of IP and technology law with a number of other policy areas requires a principled framework for fostering Canada’s digital advantage. Minister Moore and those involved in this process should work to ensure that such a strategy fosters access to digital technologies and content, the ability to use these resources in innovative ways, and that it provides legal mechanisms that entrench the security and privacy necessary to legally use, develop, and exploit digital resources for economic and human development.

In my opinion, successfully steering this ship to port will help define Moore's time as the Minister of Industry and may also set him up nicely for any future endeavours he undertakes.

Joseph F. Turcotte is an IPilogue Editor, a PhD Candidate and SSHRC Doctoral Fellow in the Communication & Culture Program (Politics & Policy) at �첥��Ƶ, and a Nathanson Graduate Fellow at the Jack & Mae Nathanson Centre on Transnational Human Rights, Crime and Security at Osgoode Hall Law School.

The post The Ever-Present Need for Canada’s ‘Digital Economy Strategy’ appeared first on IPOsgoode.

We had many achievements last year. ��From our highly regarded , to our , the IPilogue has remained one of the top IP Blogs in Canada. IP Osgoode’s IPilogue blog won second place in the for the best blog about education. Our IP Osgoode Speaker Series featured guests such as , , and publishing industry veteran . Our Moot Team for both best mooting team and best factum, and our IP Intensive program has with the addition of three brand new placements at Apotex, Cobalt Pharmaceuticals and CBC/Radio-Canada.

2013-2014 is set to become another successful year at IP Osgoode, and there are many ways for you to become involved. is currently looking for new editors for Fall 2013. These positions are open to all law students in Canada and abroad. For the more artistically gifted, we are also looking for new art editors to help with the masthead artwork and various other projects relating to IP Osgoode. The IPilogue is a great place to get involved in the discussion on about current pressing IP and Technology issues and many student posts have enabled greater employment opportunities for students and let to publication in leading journals. are due Monday September 16th.

We are also looking for Osgoode Hall Law School students to work in our . The clinic is staffed by student volunteers and helps provide legal resources to under-resourced start-up organizations or entrepreneurs requiring assistance in their innovation and commercialization activities. for clinical fellows are due Monday September 16th.

There are a number of events planned for the next school year. Our IP Intensive class is currently hosting . These seminars cover a wide variety of topics that range from “Collective Copyright Administration” to “Intellectual Property Reform Process”, from “Biotechnology Focus: Pharma” to “Privacy & IP”. The seminars will be led by government officials, industry executives, IP practitioners, academics and members of the judiciary. Anyone interested in attending one of these seminars should contact IP Osgoode.

IP Osgoode will also be hosting a full day symposium entitled on October 10th. The seminar will focus on the legal and commercial aspects of user generated content, and feature topics such as the UGC exception under Canadian copyright law, the interaction UGC with fair dealing, legal aspects of fan fiction and appropriation art, international treaty standards. All are welcome to attend and there is no registration fee. Please RSVP by October 3rd to (Event Code: UGC).

Finally, I am pleased to announce that our IP Osgoode Speaker Series will feature an appearance by Supreme Court Justice Marshall Rothstein on November 25th. Further details on his appearance will be announced on the IP Osgoode website later this year.

Whether your interests lie in media, business, patents or technology, there is something for you at IP Osgoode. For more details about all our programs, see our clubs fair booth this Friday September 6th or contact IP Osgoode at iposgoode@osgoode.yorku.ca.

Giuseppina D’Agostino is the Founder and Director of IP Osgoode, an Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, and the Founder of the IP Intensive.

The post Anticipating Another Successful Year for IP Osgoode appeared first on IPOsgoode.

In what is now dubbed the Supreme Court’s “copyright pentalogy”—five copyright judgments released concurrently by the Court in July 2012[1]—the unprecedented importance accorded by the Court to the principle of technological neutrality is clear; what remains unclear is precisely what “technological neutrality” means, why it matters, and whether or how it can (or should) ever be attained.

This chapter aims to critically assess the significance of the principle and its potential to guide the future development of copyright law and policy in Canada. In Part 2, I set out the various shades of meaning that can be attached to technological neutrality, first as a principle of sound regulation, and then as a principle of statutory interpretation by the courts. I review, in Part 3, the reasons delivered by the Justices in three of the five cases to examine the various and divergent ways in which the principle of technological neutrality was defined and rationalized by members of the Court. I proceed to explore the application of the principle and its role in resolving the legal issues before the Court, drawing connections between conceptualizations of the principle and its interpretive impact, and focusing on its capacity to support the extension and/or circumscription of owners’ and users’ rights.

In Part 4, I consider whether the role accorded to technological neutrality as a guiding principle is justifiable or appropriate in the context of Canadian copyright policy. Arguing that its justification is found in, and flows from, the concept of balance at the heart of the copyright system, I proceed to offer some thoughts on its potential significance in the future of Canadian copyright law and in light of the recent amendments to the Copyright Act.[2] Part 5 concludes that the new emphasis placed by the Court on technological neutrality as a guiding principle is an important and positive development for Canada’s copyright system. The caveat, however, is that the principle cannot perform this role effectively if conceived (or rhetorically invoked) as a limited principle of formal non-discrimination that merely justifies the extension of copyright’s reach. Rather, I argue, it must be conceived in a functional sense, shaping copyright norms to produce a substantively equivalent effect across technologies, with a view to preserving the copyright balance in the digital realm.

Featured here is the first part of a book chapter written by Carys Craig, Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School. The full chapter is available for download . The book is entitled "The Copyright Pentalogy: How the Supreme Court of Canada Shook the Foundations of Canadian Copyright Law" edited by Michael Geist, and is available for purchase or download .

The post Technological Neutrality: (Pre)Serving the Purposes of Copyright Law appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Canada Day is fast-approaching.�� This means it’s also time to prepare your submissions to Canada’s IP Writing Challenge!�� The submission deadline is Monday July 1, at 5pm. The winner from each category will receive a prize of $1000 (CAD), publication on the IP Osgoode website, and consideration for publication in the Canadian Intellectual Property Review and/or the Intellectual Property Journal. Please send your submissions to iposgoode@osgoode.yorku.ca.

Do you have a paper from a recently completed intellectual property class? A case note on a intellectual property related decision? Canada's IP Writing Challenge is the perfect chance to showcase your opinions and gain recognition from the greater Canadian intellectual property community. We are looking for thoughtful and well-researched papers on intellectual property and public policy scholarship to enhance our discussion. We encourage a broad range of perspectives and topics from within the various categories of intellectual property law including: patents, trade-marks, industrial design and copyright.

There are three categories for entrants this year:

1. Law student category (LL.B, J.D., BCL, and LL.L students)
2. Graduate student category (LL.M, S.J.D.��and PhD students)
3. Professional category (legal and business professionals who have been practicing 7 years or less, including patent agents and trade-mark agents)

The set topic for the professional category is a case note on an intellectual property related decision issued after January 1, 2012. The submissions for the aw student and graduate student category are welcome on any topic relating to intellectual property law.

Full details of the rules and submission process on are available at .

We look forward to reading your work!

The post REMINDER: Canada Day Is The Submission Deadline for Canada's IP Writing Challenge! appeared first on IPOsgoode.

As the final contribution to the "ATRIP Passes 30" Symposium, which collects the reminiscences of the past and current ATRIP presidents, this short essay provides, in chronological order, some key information about all the pre-ATRIP Round Tables and ATRIP Congresses. This short history not only documents the historical origins, rapid growth and past accomplishments of an important transnational professional association, but also reflects the rapid development of the intellectual property field in the past three decades.

***

This symposium collects the reminiscences of the past and current presidents of the International Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property (ATRIP). As shown in this collection, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has played an instrumental role in both the formation of ATRIP and the development of intellectual property as a field of teaching and research. In the past three decades, WIPO has also offered important and continuing support to ATRIP Congresses. It not only has made available its staff (including members of the WIPO Academy), but has also provided generous funding support to ATRIP delegates from developing countries.

Given the close and longstanding ties between WIPO and ATRIP, it is logical for The WIPO Journal to pay tribute to the latter and to document the historical origins and noted accomplishments of this transnational professional academic organisation. Through a trip down memory lane, we not only can learn more about the organisation’s rapid growth and past challenges, but can also better understand the development of the intellectual property field in general. This symposium should be of great interest to all intellectual property professors and researchers, in particular past and present ATRIP members.

Of great interest are the historical origins of ATRIP (including WIPO’s role in the early and much lesser known Round Tables), the focus of its early annual meetings on the teaching of and research in intellectual property (in particular the discussion and dissemination of syllabi of intellectual property courses), the subsequent exploration of intellectual property issues relating to universities and other academic institutions, the relationship between the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the session on national reports (which remains active and is often held on the last day of an ATRIP Congress) and the emergence of specific conference themes in the mid-2000s (which now lend themselves to books published in the ATRIP Series by Edward Elgar Publishing).

In addition, the symposium contributions reflect both the foresight and pioneering effort of WIPO and ATRIP leaders, many of whom have now become elder statesmen in the intellectual property field. The contributions also vividly capture the camaraderie among intellectual property professors and researchers—a trait that, sadly, is not always present in the legal academia. Perhaps because the intellectual property field did not come of age until two decades ago, scholars in this field have always been more open, collegial and supportive of each other, even when they disagree on key issues and developments.

Featured here is the beginning of a paper by , IP Osgoode Research Affiliate, Kern Family Chair in Intellectual Property Law and Founding Director of the Intellectual Property Law Center at Drake University Law School. Born and raised in Hong Kong, Professor Yu is a leading expert in international intellectual property and communications law. He also writes and lectures extensively on international trade, international and comparative law, and the transition of the legal systems in China and Hong Kong. The full article can be found .

The post Taking ATRIP Down Memory Lane appeared first on IPOsgoode.

IP Osgoode would like to congratulate the winners of the Gowlings Best Blog in IP Law and Technology Prize for 2012-2013.�� Four prizes in total are awarded each year to Osgoode students and the winning blog posts are featured in the IPilogue. Recipients also receive a $500 award, are announced at Convocation and receive a permanent notation on their official Osgoode transcript.

The (the “Gowlings IPilogue Prize”) was pioneered in Intellectual Property class in the Fall 2007 term and has been generously sponsored each year since then by .

All blog entries and comments on the IPilogue submitted by Osgoode students are considered automatically for the prize (except those submitted by IPilogue Editors). In each academic semester, there is one prize for the best blog post and one prize for the best comment.

For students, this is a chance to recognize their research and writing in a specialized and technical field.�� It also encourages law students with a strong interest in Intellectual Property Law to develop that interest.�� Of course, the subject matter of the IPilogue goes beyond strictly IP.�� Our stories also delve into related areas of Technology Law, including: internet law, privacy rights, broadcasting, e-commerce, social media and free speech.

We are pleased to announce this year’s winners of the Gowlings IPilogue Prizes:

Fall 2012:

Best Blog: Mark Bowman��()

Best Comment: Maximilian Paterson (Comment on )

Winter 2013:

Best Blog: Meng Xiao (Nancy) Situ ()

Best Comment:��Danny Titolo (Comment on )

Congratulations to our winners and thank you to all who make the IPilogue possible.�� We are most grateful to Gowlings for its generous support.

The post Winners of the Gowlings Best Blog in IP and Technology Law Prize! appeared first on IPOsgoode.