Copyright in Ideas: Equitable Ownership of Copyright
The Canadian Intellectual Property Review (CIPR) is a double-blind peer reviewed journal. It is sent to over 1,800 IPIC members at no cost and can be purchased by non-members for a fee. If you would like to browse the articles included in the CIPR, please consult our database below.
Any author, member or non-member can submit an article for consideration in the CIPR. The CIPR Editorial Board welcomes both short pieces (2,000 to 5,000 words) that may be included in the Notes section of the issue or longer, more in-depth articles. The maximum length of articles, including references, is 20,000 words. Articles may be submitted in French or English. Each article should be accompanied by a 150-word abstract.
All submissions undergo a double-blind review process: the reviewers are not given the authors' identities and the identities of the reviewers are shielded from the authors. Additionally, articles submitted must be original and must not have been previously published elsewhere.
If you would like to submit an article for an upcoming issue of the CIPR please contact admin@ipic.ca.
Canadian Intellectual Property Review
Share
Copyright in Ideas: Equitable Ownership of Copyright
Issue: Volume 29 no 1
Author(s): Robert Tomkowicz
Abstract:
One of the fundamental principles of copyright law is that copyright does not protect ideas, but only the expression of ideas. This is referred to as the expression versus idea dichotomy. According to this principle, a person who contributes only an idea to a copyright work cannot claim authorship or joint authorship of that work. Instead, it is the author or creator of the work who becomes the sole copyright owner, even when the idea appropriated by the author was the sine qua non for the creation of the work. This article delves into the concept of equitable ownership of copyright. It reviews jurisprudence regarding equitable copyright in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Hong Kong and finds that only in Canada has this issue been neglected in legal discourse. It examines the possibility of using the law of equity to assist contributors of ideas who cannot claim legal ownership of copyright under the Copyright Act.
