R. v. Allen (C.), (2006) 399 A.R. 245 (PC)

• Judge: Fraser, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: April 13, 2006
• Citations: (2006), 399 A.R. 245 (PC);2006 ABPC 115

R. v. Allen (C.) (2006), 399 A.R. 245 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] A.R. TBEd. AP.073

Her Majesty the Queen v. Commodore Allen (040925166P1; 2006 ABPC 115)

Indexed As: R. v. Allen (C.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Fraser, P.C.J.

April 13, 2006.

Summary:

The accused was charged with infringing a subsisting copyright that Sherlock held on a book of maps of the City of Calgary, which was described as an artistic and literary work, contrary to s. 42(1)(a) of the Copyright Act.

The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused guilty.

Copyright - Topic 6205

Offences - General - Evidence - Doctrine of willful blindness - [See Copyright - Topic 6208 ].

Copyright - Topic 6208

Offences - General - Selling infringing works - The accused was charged with infringing a subsisting copyright that Sherlock held on a book of maps of the City of Calgary, which was described as an artistic and literary work, contrary to s. 42(1)(a) of the Copyright Act - The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused guilty - There was no doubt that Sherlock's compilation of the material and the arrangement into a map book was original and qualified as an artistic and literary work - The pagination, grid system, spiral, labeling, overlapping, street index and features index, together added up to an artistic and literary work that was full of originality and qualified under the Copyright Act as an artistic and literary work in which copyright subsisted - There was no question that the accused copied the Sherlock map in every aspect - Any changes made were purely cosmetic - With his experience and sophistication in the business of map making, the accused was fully aware the Sherlock map book was protected by copyright or was fully aware of that probability - He copied the Sherlock map book in every detail - He knew that constituted infringement or at least that he was probably infringing a subsisting copyright - At the very least he knew he should make inquiries - He was so wilfully blind, that he had actual knowledge.

Cases Noticed:

CCH Canadian Ltd. et al. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339; 317 N.R. 107, appld. [para. 13].

Weetman v. Baldwin, 2001 BCPC 292, refd to. [para. 14].

Slumber-Magic Adjustable Bed Co. v. Sleep-King Adjustable Bed Co., [1985] 1 W.W.R. 112 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 15].

Alexandria Drafting v. Amsterdam, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8197; 43 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1247; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P27,698, dist. [para. 33].

R. v. Laurier Office Mart Inc., [1994] O.J. No. 2745 (Ont. C.J. Prov. Div.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. Sault Ste. Marie (City), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 1299; 21 N.R. 295, refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Sansregret (1985), 58 N.R. 123; 35 Man.R.(2d) 1; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 223 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

Photo Centre Inc. et al. v. R. (1985), 9 C.P.R.(3d) 425 (Que. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Biron (D.) (1992), 127 N.B.R.(2d) 142; 319 A.P.R. 142 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Harris (M.D.) (1990), 81 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 147; 255 A.P.R. 147; 34 C.P.R.(3d) 392 (Nfld. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 40].

Statutes Noticed:

Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, sect. 42(1)(a) [para. 2].

Counsel:

B. Mercier, for the Federal Crown;

W. Logan and M. James, for the accused.

This case was heard by Fraser, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 13, 2006.