Skip to main content
// //

Judgments expected from the Supreme Court on Thursday could change the way Canadians listen to online music.

Thinkstock/Thinkstock

The Supreme Court of Canada will hand down several judgments on Thursday that could change the way we listen to music online – including a ruling on whether 30-second song previews in digital stores are an infringement of copyright.

Among the five rulings will be a determination if Internet service providers are responsible for royalty payments when consumers listen to or download music online.

The ISPs – including Rogers, BCE and Telus – say the wording of the Copyright Act on what constitutes a "telecommunication" to the "public" is unclear.

Story continues below advertisement

In the case of music, the Act's current language means listening to music online counts as a public performance, meaning ISPs are required to pay performance royalties to the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN).

ISPs, however, argue that the definition of "public" is misconstrued when talking about the Internet.

Should the court rule in favour of the ISPs, then the companies may no longer need to pay royalties to copyright owners for music consumed online. If this is the case, the ISPs say in court filings that they hope the ruling will lead to clearer copyright rules for other kinds of intellectual property that is consumed online, including books, games and magazines.

The court is also expected to rule on whether performance royalties can be collected for music used in video games, and whether record labels and recording artists are eligible for royalties from movie and TV soundtracks. (Currently, they're only collected for music publishers and songwriters.)

The fifth ruling will examine whether or not photocopying textbooks for classroom use in public schools is considered "fair dealing" under copyright law.

All five cases were initially heard by the Supreme Court in December, 2011.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Tickers mentioned in this story
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies