I consider it to be a great blessing that the program not only continued but thrived notwithstanding the challenges of COVID-19. The two-week intensive held on Zoom was astutely condensed to avoid the dangers of – a subject about which I have written in one of my other . Thereafter, students were to complete their placements solely online while continuing to attend periodic Zoom classes sprinkled throughout the remainder of the semester. I’d like to take this moment to commend not only the program's administrators, but also the placement partners for continuing to execute upon its obligations to the program. The pandemic would have made any objection justifiable given the state of the world; however, thanks to the work of many, we were all able to continue with the program.

I was fortunate enough to have been selected for a placement with the Canadian Intellectual Property Office ; a position that would have traditionally required myself to relocate to Ottawa. And despite missing out on some “social” gatherings that would have taken place but for COVID-19, my mentor at CIPO quickly made me feel welcome to the team with pre-scheduled weekly updates even before my arrival – both professional and non-professional – that bridged the gap quite nicely.

is a special operating agency of that delivers intellectual property (IP) services in Canada and educates Canadians on how to use IP more effectively. My predominant role as a legal intern was to provide supporting research for internal policy initiatives; and the projects I worked justifiably spanned across the many different services and tools that CIPO offers to Canadians. Some of my more notable research projects included providing supporting research with regard to tools, how to meet the terms of the newly ratified , and as regards Canada’s relationship with First Nations.

With regard to my CUSMA research, since the ratification of the new NAFTA (CUSMA), s. requires that member Parties provide the means to adjust (extend) the term of the patent for patent applications that have been subject to “unreasonable delays” in the issuance of a patent. Subsection describes “unreasonable delays” as “a delay...of more than five years from the date of filing... or three years after a request for examination...”. Mexico and the US have already fulfilled their obligations. Canada does not contain a term adjustment for delays in its existing patent regime, and no such provision is included in the Implementation Act. Under Article of CUSMA, Canada will have four and a half years from July 1, 2020, to implement this change.

Overall, my Zoom-semester at the Canadian Intellectual Property Office was one that I will never forget. I had the opportunity to learn from top policy experts responsible for making decisions that shape the future of Canadians. The research I engaged in was not only enlightening, but inspiring, knowing that it will be supporting the decisions of individuals with such responsibility to our Country. I met some amazing people with the most brilliant minds. My only regret is that I wasn’t able to see them face to face (though, our social zoom calls were some of my favourite moments of learning; one could argue, the most important).

The IP Intensive is program like no other. For me, it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that provided an avenue for myself to bridge the gap between my interests in law and my professional career. It provided an opportunity to gain experience applying the intellectual property doctrine we were taught in school to real world problems. Through this, I acquired new perspectives on how to think about the law and gained invaluable mentorship to smooth out the rough edges before I enter the work force. I highly recommend this program to any student interested in IP Law.

Written by Joseph Simile, JD Candidate 2021, enrolled in Professors D’Agostino and Vaver 2020/2021 IP & Technology Law Intensive Program at Osgoode Hall Law School. As part of the course requirements, students were asked to write a reflective blog on their internship experience.

The post The Inaugural Zoom Class of 2020 (IP Intensive Reflection) appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Editors at the , and have attempted to address some of these issues by publishing articles delineating ways to avoid “Zoom Fatigue” and other negative consequences. Colleen Flaherty of however questions its overall sustainability. Quoting Phil Hill, a partner at ed-tech consultancy, “the limitations of synchronous video are equity and access” and that no number of “guides” are going to help students who can’t afford laptops, internet, and quiet learning spaces during scheduled class times.

The article goes on to conclude that education institutions will need to focus their efforts on developing asynchronous teaching methods – methods in which students learn via videos, readings and other [offline] media – to better address issues relating to access and equity. Yet, synchronous formats have received the bulk of attention. Institutions have moved in droves to synchronous learning environments, leveraging online-video software that had existed pre-COVID such as and And now other software companies, such as and , are popping up to ostensibly offer a more curated synchronous experience.

Asynchronous environments, on the other hand, have not received much attention. This may be due to educators merely having to replicate their existing lectures online with synchronous formats, whereas asynchronous environments require educators to source high-quality offline material that matches existing curricula, where it does not exist. This seems to be where the asynchronous classroom breaks down – the lack of high-quality asynchronous content for educators to leverage. The content-platforms that educators do have at their disposal, like and , have inherent drawbacks such as a lack of curricula alignment and poor quality assurance, pre-empting any possibility of institutionalized adoption.

There are efforts being made, most notably by , to develop content for asynchronous learning environments. As textbooks are the de facto learning material in education curricula, and as publishers typically and ensure all moral rights by the original author are waived, they are ostensibly the best suited to create such works (e.g. video explanations, audio-books, note abbreviations, etc.) However, textbook publishers deriving videos from their original titles is rather analogous to music publishers deriving remixes from their original tracks. The possibility exists, and they may retain the necessary copyright to do so; however, . The publisher has no monetary impetus to engage in the (re)creation of other works, especially if it threatens the sales of the original track; the same could be said for textbook publishers and book sales.��

There does however exist an impetus for other creators to create such works. Over the years, the music industry has evolved to reflect this need by providing artists the means to acquire licences to create such derivative works.�� In the US, for artists to cover songs can be purchased online with notice to the publisher. In Canada, the equivalent is accomplished through the collective, responsible for issuing mechanical licences to musical derivationists. For music sampling subject to copyright, which includes the rights to use the voice of artists, private entities such as are attempting to pre-clear tracks by negotiating advances and royalty rights on behalf of the final user.

Notwithstanding minor differences in definitions between literary and musical works in the , the concept of reproduction licensing is the same. Just as mechanical structure and lyrical composition of musical works are protected, so too are the paragraph structures and sentences in literary textbooks. The only difference is that the music industry has had decades to mature into what has emerged as a comprehensive system of collectives, private entities, and compulsory-licence regimes able to extend licences for the many layers of rights contained in musical compositions. While the education technology industry, still in its infancy, does not have such regimes, the development of such may help spur the creation of high-quality asynchronous content and thus the adoption of its educational method, which may elevate our education system to a point where we at least don’t complain about it (as much).

Written by Joseph Simile, Osgoode JD Candidate, enrolled in Professors D’Agostino and Vaver 2020/2021 IP & Technology Law Intensive Program at Osgoode Hall Law School. As part of the course requirements, students were asked to write a blog on a topic of their choice.

��

The post Zoom Boom or Doom? The Fatigue of Synchronous Learning Saved by the Sweet Melody of Copyright appeared first on IPOsgoode.

The Socratic teaching method gained popularity in the early 1900s due to its pedagogical advantages of teaching students to apply their knowledge critically by thinking on their feet; however, during the mid to late twentieth century, the method began to plateau and fall out of popularity. While there are many reasons that can be cited for this occurrence, the one that seems to be consistent is that .

One may look to how law school has changed over the years for an explanation: attendance is not forced; grading has become anonymized; and lectures are recorded enabling students to forgo the long commute and listen after the fact. These changes, along with the ever-increasing pool of distractions associated with the Internet, among other things, have resulted in the Socratic method being all but .

REDISCOVERING ANCIENT RUINS BURIED IN COPYRIGHT

A resurrection is possible, however. The question must turn to how educators can stimulate class preparation. One of the ways this can be accomplished is to proliferate standardized derivative works for students to leverage in their studies such as textbook abridgements, summaries, and video tutorials. This would enable students to more easily digest the historical iterations of the law in less time, and now at home in the wake of COVID. Standardization would ensure that no student has an upper hand.

One of the main inhibitors however is copyright law. In Canada, a “fair dealing” defence for derivative educational works is recognized under section 21 of the , “for the purpose of…education”. The work must also be “fair”, defined as a question of fact determined by six non-exhaustive criteria laid out in the landmark case of , [2004] 1 SCR 339. What this means is that professors, educators, and students who wish to create, sell or distribute helpful educational works risk copyright infringement, which seems to have been enough to prevent proliferation altogether.

One solution could be to wait until the owners of the original works – namely publishers – step up and begin to create derivative works. In the wake of COVID-19, publishers may very well respond to the increase in demand for online education with derivative works that can be leveraged by educators. However, I believe the better answer would be an online platform that holds the rights of the original works on behalf of creators (via a licence from a publisher) and allows them to create content without having to seek a license themselves. While this concept is largely unexplored, I hypothesize that creators will seek out works most in demand and begin creating and selling derivatives on the platform.

THE NEED FOR PRESERVATION VIA MODERN TECHNOLOGY & THE WAY FORWARD

As the law continues to iterate over time and the distractions of technology increase, the need to leverage that technology to better distill information to students is at all an all time high. Derivative educational works are a part of the answer. And while copyright creates some unique barriers, a unified platform with a business licensing strategy may be all that it takes to create the education of the future that the present has been desperately waiting for.

Written by Joseph Simile, a second year JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School. Joseph is also the editor of the IP Law Journal.

The post What Happened to Socrates appeared first on IPOsgoode.