The Copyright Implications of Book Editing Apps: Case Study—Story Surgeon
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
The Copyright Implications of Book Editing Apps: Case Study—Story Surgeon
Issue: Volume 30 no 2
Author(s): James Plotkin
Abstract:
There is a new type of software app currently being developed that allows the purchaser of an ebook to make edits to the content of the book by creating (or using existing) “filter” files. This article analyzes Story Surgeon, one such app in development. The copyright implications of such an app are myriad. Although Story Surgeon’s clever architecture may serve to shield it from copyright liability in the United States, Canadian copyright law may offer some unique challenges (and opportunities) for book editing apps like this one north of the border. This article examines the Canadian copyright implications of this new technology by canvassing such issues as moral rights, enabling infringement, the user-generated content (UGC) exception, and fair dealing for the purposes of criticism and review, parody, satire, and education.
