Arbitrator, Not the Court, to decide on Copyright Dispute
ARBITRATOR,NOTTHECOURT,TODECIDEONCOPYRIGHTDISPUTE
LAURENTCARRIÈREANDAUDREYBALTADJIAN*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP
L
AWYERS,PATENTANDTRADEMARKAGENTS
InWiebevSaskatchewanInstituteofAppliedScienceandTechnology[2007SKQB
60]theQueen’sBenchofSaskatchewanhasconcludedthatitdidnothavethe
appropriatejurisdictiontodeterminethecopyrightinfringementmattersraisedin
WolfgangWiebe’sstatementofclaim,andaccordinglyorderedastayofproceedings
ontheCourtofQueen’sBenchfile.JusticeGNAllbrightheldthatSection25ofthe
TradeUnionActlimitsWiebetopursuinghisgrievancethroughthearbitration
processprovidedforinhiscollectiveagreement.
WiebewasemployedbytheSaskatchewanInstituteofAppliedScienceand
Technology
(SIAST)asamathematicsinstructoratthePalliserCampus.Duringthe
courseofhisemploymenthecreatedcourselearningmaterials(themathsmaterials)
onhisowninitiativeandinhisowntimeoutsidetheSIASTworkplace.
WiebeagreedtoanarrangementwithJohnLandgraf,theprogrammeheadof
mathematicsatPalliser,toallowthemathsmaterialstobeprintedforusebyother
instructorsandtobecirculatedtostudentsontheconditionthathecontinuedtohold
allintellectualpropertyandcopyrightstothem.However,shortlyafterthistheSIAST
reproducedWiebe’scopyrightedmathsmaterialswithouthisconsent,andstarted
sellingthemwithoutanyshareofprofitsgoingtohim.Wiebeclaimedinjunctiverelief
anddamages(includinglossofprofitandpunitiveandexemplarydamages)fromthe
SIASTasaresultofthebreachofhiscopyrightedwork.
TheSIASTsoughttostrikeWiebe’sstatementofclaim,arguingthatthecourthadno
jurisdictionsincethematterswerelimitedtoanarbitrationprocesspursuantto
Section25oftheTradeUnionAct.Inaddition,theSIASTarguedthattherewasno
causeofactionagainstit,sincethemathsmaterialswere’workproducts’pursuantto
Section13oftheCopyrightAct,andthecopyrightwasthereforevestedintheSIAST,
Wiebe’semployer.AsamemberoftheSIAST’sfaculty,Wiebewasamemberofthe