Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Slouching Toward WIPO

Ten years ago, delegates at a Diplomatic Conference at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva concluded two treaties to modernize member nations' intellectual property laws to accommodate the realities of digital technology. The WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT, passed Dec. 20, 1996, and effective March 6, 2002), and the WIPO Performers' and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT, passed Dec. 20, 1996, and in force May 2, 2002), collectively known as the WIPO Internet Treaties, provide for the expansion of existing rights and the creation of new rights in subject matter protected by copyright.<br>Canada, under the guidance of successive governments led by the Liberal Party of Canada, chose to consult widely with stakeholders over the direction it should take in legislating. The result was a lengthy consultation process culminating in a bill ' Bill C-60, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act, 1st Session of the 38th Parliament, 2005 ' that implemented Canada's obligations under the WIPO Treaties, but departed from the DMCA view of those treaties in several key respects, including the scope and ambit of anti-circumvention laws. While lobbyists for rights-holder organizations ' and the U.S. Trade Representative ' denounced Bill C-60 as non-compliant with the WIPO Internet Treaties, none took such claims seriously.

28 minute readMay 30, 2006 at 11:02 AM
By
David Fewer
Slouching Toward WIPO

Ten years ago, delegates at a Diplomatic Conference at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva concluded two treaties to modernize member nations' intellectual property laws to accommodate the realities of digital technology.

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

The volume and sophistication of work hitting law firm marketing departments is accelerating. That moves the burden from responding to being ready: ready with differentiated positioning, ready with competitive intelligence, ready to get a compelling pitch to the right client before a formal process even begins. That requires more sophisticated output, produced faster, by teams that are already stretched past capacity.

April 01, 2026

The annals of copyright decisions could provide a reasonably representative catalog of what our culture has been up to over the past 200 years. A Feb. 3 decision from the Southern District of New York is a case in point. It involves a sex-trafficking conspiracy, Tweets attacking a troubled crypto firm, and a claimed transfer of copyright ownership through a restitution order in a criminal case, all over an undercurrent of competing First Amendment and victim-privacy concerns.

April 01, 2026

Matthew McConaughey secured eight federal trademark registrations covering his voice and iconic catchphrases in a novel legal strategy aimed at combating AI’s unauthorized use of his voice and likeness. The move signals an important evolution in the power dynamics between talent/brands and the companies providing generative AI tools.

April 01, 2026