Until Dec. 30, copyright protection applied to literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works for the life of their author plus another 50 years.
But as of that date, an artistic work won’t join the public domain for the life of the author plus another 70 years.
Public domain use means works can be republished or repurposed without seeking permission or paying a rights holder for the use of the work.
Public domain also allows libraries, museums and archives to use works freely for research and historical purposes, including posting online archives of the important papers of politicians and world leaders.
Any remaining copyright on writings to or by former prime minister Lester B. Pearson would have been lifted on Jan. 1, under the old law because he died in 1972. Now that won’t happen until 2043.
That period affects novels by Canadian authors such as Margaret Laurence and Gabrielle Roy, but also international writers such as J.R.R. Tolkien and Roald Dahl.
Writer associations have generally been in favour of the changes, saying the more assurance creators have to get paid for their work, the more incentive there is to create.
Academics, librarians, archivists and museums, however, argue that it limits their ability to access and use hundreds of works, most of which no longer have any commercial value.
“And that’s one of the reasons why many others are really troubled by this extension, because so many of the works may have historical cultural value, but don’t have commercial value anymore.”
Geist also disputes the notion the 50 year post-death time frame was stifling creation.
“No one is thinking of writing the great novel right now and might have hesitated for the last number of years because they’re heirs only got 50 years and they wake up this morning and think ‘now I’m really going to do it because there’s that extra 20 years of protection after I’ve died,’” he said. “People just don’t think that way.”
He said the extra protection has a commercial benefit for a small number of people, and that could have been addressed with an opt-in clause, so rights holders of works that do still have commercial value could ask for an extension.
Geist also accused the government of burying the change, by putting it near the bottom of a nearly 450-page budget bill last spring. The government didn’t highlight the copyright act changes in any of its documents about that bill.
There was also no government announcement when cabinet decided in November to set the in effect date to Dec. 30, or when it did take effect. In all, the government issued 3,998 news releases in 2022 and not one of them was about the changes to copyright law.