Work Includes Title – Some Comments on a Neglected Copyright Definition



WORKINCLUDESTITLE:
SOMECOMMENTSONANEGLECTEDCOPYRIGHTDEFINITION

by
LaurentCarrière
*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,Lawyers,
ROBIC,Patent&TrademarkAgents
CentreCDPCapital
1001Square-Victoria-BlocE–8
thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.(514)9876242-Fax(514)8457874
www.robic.ca-info@robic.com

TextofSection
1.0RelatedSections
2.0RelatedRegulations
3.0LegislativeHistory
3.1CorrespondingSectioninPriorLegislation
3.2TextofStatutes
3.2.1S.C.1931,c.8,s.2(v)
3.2.2R.S.C.1952,c.55,s.2(u)
3.2.3R.S.C.1970,c.C-30,s.2
3.2.4R.S.C.1985,c.C-42,s.2
4.0Purpose
5.0Commentary
5.1History
5.2Construction
5.2.1″Includes”
5.2.2″Includes”/Estassimilé”
5.2.3Retransmission
5.3General
5.3.1Dictionaries
5.3.2CategorizationofWorks
5.3.3Fixation&Originality
5.4Titles
5.4.1WhatisaTitle?
5.4.2NotAWorkbyItself
5.4.3CategorizationofTitles
5.4.4Original&DistinctiveTitles
5.4.5EffectofCopyrightRegistration
5.5Slogans&Headings
5.6Convention
5.7OtherProtectionsforTitles
5.7.1Trade-Marks
5.7.2PassingOff





























































©LaurentCarrière,1994-2003.
*Lawyerandtrademarkagent,LaurentCarrièreisoneoftheseniorpartnerswiththelawfirm
LEGERROBICRICHARD,g.p.andwiththepatentandtrademarkagencyfirmROBIC,g.p.
Publication108.



5.7.3Illustrations:InjunctionGranted
5.7.4Illustrations:InjunctionDenied
6.0CaseLaw
6.1CaseLaw-Canada
6.2CaseLaw-UnitedKingdom
6.3CaseLaw-UnitedStatesofAmerica
6.4CaseLaw-Varia
7.0ListofCases
7.1ListofCases-Canada
7.1.1General
7.1.2TitleofPeriodicals
7.1.3TitleofBooks
7.1.4TitleofPlays
7.1.5Varia
7.2ListofCases-UnitedKingdom
7.2.1General
7.2.2TitleofPeriodicals
7.2.3TitleofBooks
7.2.4TitleofPlays
7.3ListofCases-UnitedStatesofAmerica
7.4ListofCases-Australia
7.5ListofCases-Varia
8.0Authors
8.1Authors-Canada
8.1.1InterpretationIssues
8.1.2CopyrightIssues
8.2Authors-UnitedKingdom
8.3Authors-UnitedStatesofAmerica
8.4Authors-France
8.5Authors-Australia&NewZealand
8.6Authors-Varia
9.0ComparativeLegislation
9.1ComparativeLegislation-France
9.1.1CopyrightAct,1957,section5
9.1.2Codedelapropriétéintellectuelle,1992,sectionL.112-4
9.2ComparativeLegislation-Australia
9.2.1CopyrightAct,1968,section10
9.3ComparativeLegislation-India
9.3.1CopyrightAct,1957,section2(y)
10.0Varia
10.1Slogans/Titles/ShortPhrases/Name(CanadianCopyrightOfficeCircularno.8)
10.2CopyrightProtectionNotAvailableForNames,Titles,OrShortPhrases(United
StatesCopyrightOfficeCircularno.34)



“WORK”«ŒUVRE»*

“work”includesthetitlethereofwhensuch
titleisoriginalanddistinctive;
«oeuvre»Estassimiléàuneœuvreletitrede
l’œuvrelorsquecelui-ciestoriginalet
distinctif.

R.S.C.1985,c.C-42,s.2
§1.0RelatedSections
Section2—Definitions:“architecturalwork”,“artisticwork”,“choreographic
work”,“cinematographicwork”,“collectivesociety”,“collectivework”,
“commerciallyavailable”,“compilation”,“copyright”,“dramaticwork”,
“engraving”,“everyoriginalliterary,dramatic,musicalandartisticwork”,
“infringing”,“literarywork”,“maker”,“musicalwork”,“perceptualdisability”,
“performance”,“performer’sperformance”,“photograph”,“plate”,“sound
recording”,“sculpture”,“workofjointauthorship”;section2.1—Compilations;
section2.2Definitionof“publication”;section2.3Telecommunication;
section2.4—Communicationtothepublicbytelecommunication;section3—
Definitionof“copyright”;section3—Copyrightinworks;section4—Definition
of“publication”;section5—Conditionsforsubsistenceofcopyright;section
6—Termofcopyright;section6.1—Anonymousandpseudonymousworks;
section6.2—Anonymousandpseudonymousworksofjointauthorship;section
7—Termofcopyrightinposthumousworks;section8—Reproductionofworks
afterdeathofauthor;section9—Casesofjointauthorship;section11.1—
Cinematographicworks;section12—WhencopyrightbelongstoHerMajesty;
section13—Ownershipofcopyright;section14—Limitationwhereauthoristhe
firstownerofcopyright;section14.1—Moralrights;section14.2—Term;section
17—Cinematographicworks;section19—Righttoremuneration;section27—
Infringementgenerally;section28.1—Infringementgenerally;section28.2—
Natureofrightofintegrity;section29.1—Criticismandreview;section29.2—
Newsreporting;section29.4—Reproductionforinstruction;section29.5—
Performances;section30—Literarycollections;section30.5—Copiesfor
archivalpurposes;section30.7—Incidentaluse;section31—Interpretation
[Retransmission];section32—Reproductioninalternateformat;section32.1—
Noinfringement;section32.2—Permittedacts;section34—Copyright[Civil
remedies];section34.1—Presumptionsrespectingcopyrightandownership;
section38—Recoveryofpossessionofcopies,plates;section39—Injunction
onlyremedywhendefendantnotawareofcopyright;section40—No
injunctionincaseofabuilding;section42—Offencesandpunishment;

































































 


 





  
!

”#$%#

”&#$”#’


!

”&#$”#&

”(#$(#’#

’

section43—Infringementincaseofdramatic,operaticormusicalwork;
section44—Importationofcertaincopyrightworksprohibited;section44.1—
Definitions[Importation];section45—Exceptions[Importation];section54—
RegisterofCopyrights;section55—Copyrightinworks;section56—Copyright
insubject-matterotherthanworks;section60—Subsistenceofsubstituted
right;section64—Interpretation[utilitariandesigns];section64.1—Non-
infringementreusefularticlefeatures;section64.2—ApplicationofActto
topographies;section67—Publicaccesstorepertoires;section67.1—Filingof
proposedtariffs;section68—Boardtoconsiderproposedtariffsand
objections;section68.1—Specialandtransitionalroyaltyrates;section70.1—
Collectivesocieties;section70.11—Publicinformation;section70.2—
Applicationtofixamountofroyalty,etc.;section73—Certification;section
76—Claimsbynon-members;section77—Circumstancesinwhichlicence
maybeissuedbyBoard;section79—Definitions[Privatecopying];section
80—Wherenoinfringementofcopyright;section81—Rightofremuneration;
section83—Filingofproposedtariffs;
§2.0RelatedRegulations

None.

§3.0LegislativeHistory
§3.1CorrespondingSectioninPriorLegislation
Section2(v)from1931.06.11to1953.09.14;section2(u)from1953.09.15to
1971.07.14;section2from1971.07.15topresent[Note:“Oeuvre”,asthe
Frenchtranslationof“work”,wasnumbered2(v)from1931.06.11to
1953.09.14and2(u)from1953.09.15to1971.07.14.]
§3.2TextofStatutes
§3.2.1S.C.1931,c.8,s.2(v)[C.I.F.1931-06-11]:
WORK
(v)workshallincludethetitlethereof
whensuchtitleisoriginalanddistinctive.O
EUVRE
v)«oeuvre»comprendletitrede
lœuvrelorsquecetitreestoriginal
etdistinctif.

§3.2.2R.S.C.1952,c.55,s.2(u)[1953-08-15]

&

WORK
(u)”work”includesthetitlethereofwhen
suchtitleisoriginalanddistinctive;
O
EUVRE
u)«oeuvre»comprendletitredelœuvre
lorsquecetitreestoriginaletdistinctif;

§3.2.3R.S.C.1970,c.C-30,s.2[1971-07-15]
WORK
“work”includesthetitlethereofwhensuch
titleisoriginalanddistinctive;O
EUVRE
«oeuvre»comprendletitredelœuvre
lorsquecetitreestoriginaletdistinctif;

§3.2.4R.S.C.1985,c.C-42,s.2[C.I.F.1988-12-12]:

WORKŒUVRE

“work”includesthetitlethereofwhensuch
titleisoriginalanddistinctive;
«oeuvre»Estassimiléàuneœuvreletitrede
l’œuvrelorsquecelui-ciestoriginalet
distinctif.
§4.0Purpose
Thissectionprovidesthatthetitleofaworkmaybeasubjectofcopyright
protectionwhenoriginalanddistinctive.

§5.0Commentary

L’oeuvreestlemasquemortuairedelaconception.–WalterBENJAMIN
§5.1History
Thissection,whichremainedsubstantiallyunchangedsinceitsintroductionin
1931,hasnocounterpartintheUnitedKingdomCopyrightAct,1911.
§5.2Construction
§5.2.1“includes”

%

Theword“includes”isgenerallyusedininterpretationclausestoextendthe
meaningofwordsorexpressionsinastatute.Whenthesewordsorexpressions
areused,theymustbeconstruedascomprehendingnotonlysuchthingsas
theysignifyaccordingtotheirnaturalimportbutalsothosethingswhichthe
interpretationclausedeclaresthattheyshallinclude.“Ithasbeenestablished
thatwhenthestatuteemploystheword‘including’or‘includes’ratherthan
‘means’thedefinitiondoesnotpurporttobecompleteorexhaustiveand
thereisnoexclusionofthenaturalordinarymeaningofthewords”:Laidlawv.
MetropolitanToronto(Municipality),[1978]2S.C.R.736,SpenceJ.
Therefore,sinceintroducedbytheword“includes”,thedefinitionof“work”
shouldbeconstruedasillustrativeorextensiveandnotasacompleteand
exhaustiveenumeration:CÔTÉ(Pierre-André),TheInterpretationofLegislation
inCanada,2nded.(Montréal,Blais,1992),atpp.55-58;DRIEDGER(ElmerA.),
ConstructionofStatutes,2nded.(Toronto,Butterworths,1983),atpp.18-22;
PIGEON(Louis-Philippe),DraftingandInterpretingLegislation(Toronto,
Carswell,1988),atpp.32-35.
§5.2.2“includes”/“estassimilé”
Intheprocessofthe1985revisionoftheCopyrightAct,theword“comprend”
intheFrenchtext(asitwasusedsince1931;see§3.2LegislativeHistory,supra)
wasreplaced,albeitunfortunately,by“estassimilé”whichconveystheidea
ofcomparison,similarityinaclassificationorincorporationwithinasystem
(i.e.,“assimilation”)ratherthanoneofplacinginaclassorcategory(i.e.,
“inclusion”).
§5.2.3Retransmission
InitsFrenchtext,section31,whichdealswiththeretransmissionoflocal
signals,usesitsowndefinitionof“work”,namely:««oeuvre»Oeuvrelittéraire,
dramatique,musicaleouartistique.»
Suchadefinition,quitesurprisingly,doesnotcoversubsections3(1.4)and
3(1.5),whichdealwithsomeoperationalmodalitiesofsection28.01.
Therefore,forthepurposeofsection3,“work”isstilldefinedinsection2.
§5.3General

Làoùd’autresproposentdesoeuvres,
Jeneprétendspasautrechosequedemontrermonesprit

(

—AntoninArtaud,L’ombilicdeslimbes(1925)

Thedefinitionprovidedbysection2doesnotreallyhelptomakeclearthe
meaningoftheword“work”,asthedefinitiononlyreferstothetitle.
§5.3.1Dictionaries
Astheterm“work”isnototherwisedefinedintheCopyrightAct,useful
referencecouldbemadetoordinarydictionariesinordertoascertainthe
truemeaningoftheword:seeComposers’,Authors’&PublishersAssn.
(Canada)Ltd.v.CTVTelevisionNetworkLtd.,[1968]S.C.R.676,PigeonJ.at
681.
The1984ThirdRevisionEditionoftheShorterOxfordEnglishDictionary,
provides,amongstothers,forthefollowingdefinition:

1.Theproductoftheoperationorlabourofapersonorotheragent;
creation,handiwork.Alsovaguely,theresultofone’slabour,something
accomplished;5.Aliteraryormusicalcomposition(viewedinrelationtoits
authororcomposer)(…);6.Aproductofanyofthefinearts(inrelationto
theartist),asapainting,astatute,etc.
Foritspart,the1983revisionofGageCanadianDictionaryoffersthefollowing
definition:“somethingmadeordone,especiallysomethingcreative;the
resultofaneffort”.
The1988SecondRevisedEditionofLegrandRobertdelalanguefrançaise
defines“œuvre”as,interalia:“Ensembleorganisédesignesetdematériaux
propresàunart,misenformeparl’espritcréateur;composition,production
littéraireouartistique”.
§5.3.2Categorizationofworks
However,inviewofsection5(1)oftheCopyrightAct,inordertoqualifyfor
copyrightprotection,aworkmust,amongstotherthings,fallintooneormore
ofthefourcategoriesstatedatunderthedefinitionof“everyoriginal…work”
referredtoinsection2,namely:
i)artisticworks,
ii)dramaticworks,
iii)literaryworks,and
iv)musicalworks.

)

TheCopyrightActmakesalsoreferencetoothertypesofworks:hence,
“architecturalwork”,“choreographicwork”,“cinematographicwork”,
“photograph”and“sculpture”aredefinedbuttheydonotconstitute
categoryoftheirown,beingincludedinoneofthefourmaincategoriesof
protectableworks;furthermore,if“collectivework”and“workofjoint
authorship”aredefinedthey,also,donotconstituteacategoryoftheirown
butratherqualifyasothertypesofworks.
Priortothecomingintoforceon1991.09.01ofAnActtoamendthe
CopyrightAct(S.C.1997,c.24),inadditiontothosefourcategoriesofworks,
thensubsection5(3)oftheCopyrightActcreates,specificprotectionfor
“records,perforatedrollsandothercontrivancesbymeansofwhichsounds
maybemechanicallyreproduced,inlikemannerasifthosecontrivances
weremusical,literaryordramaticworks”[ourunderlinings].Forthepurposeof
theCopyrightAct,thosecontrivancesaretobeconsideredas“work”:seeFly
byNiteMusicCo.Ltd.v.RecordWherehouseLtd.(1975),[1975]F.C.386
(F.C.T.D.)MahoneyJ.,atpp.393-394.However“soundrecordings”,
“performer’sperformances”and“communicationsignals”arenowprotected
as“subjectmattersotherthanworks”:seesection2definitionof“copyright”,
sections15,18and21.
§5.3.3Fixationandoriginality
AsputbyCameronJ.inCanadianAdmiralCorp.v.Rediffusion,Inc.,[1954]
Ex.C.R.382(Ex.Ct.at294):“forcopyrighttosubsistina‘work’itmustbe
expressedtosomeextentatleastinsomematerialform,capableof
identificationandhavingamoreorlesspermanentendurance.”Asa
consequence,oralworks,unlesstheyarefixedinsomematerialway,willnot
beprotectedundertheCopyrightAct:seediscussionundersection2
definitionof“everyoriginal…work”.
Thecharacter,qualityorthemeritofaworkisimmaterial,butonlyworksthat
areoriginal(i.e.,notcopied)willdeservecopyrightprotection.Furthermore,
asageneralrule,copyrightisnotconcernedwiththeprotectionofideasand
schemesbutratherwiththeirexpression:seesection2definitionof“every
original…work”.
“‘Work’asusedintheCopyrightActmeanstheorderedexpressionof
thought”:STERLING(J.A.L.)etal.,CopyrightLawintheUnitedKingdom,1st
ed.(London,LegalBooks,1986),atno.214.
§5.4Titles

”

Lestitresdeslivressontsouventd’effrontésimposteurs.—Honoréde
BALZAC
(…)nousnecommettonspasl’erreurdesromanciers,quisecroient
tenus,quandilsontleurtitre,d’écrireensupplémentleromanlui-
m
me.—JeanGIRAUDOUX,LafolledeChaillot
Letitreestlacoiffuredel’œuvrelittéraire.L’auteuryattacheautant
d’importancequ’unefemmeàsonchapeau.Nil’unnil’autren’ont
tort:commelechapeauestlecouronnementd’unetoilette,letitre
estlecomplémentdel’œuvre.Unmot-panacherévèleletrait
caractéristiquedel’œuvreoudesonauteur.—MAYRAND(Albert),
Respectautitredel’œuvrelittéraire(1957),17RevueduBarreau49,
atp.49.
§5.4.1Whatisatitle?
Atitleisgenerallyunderstoodasthenameofawork,beingabook,apoem,
aplay,asong,amovie,etc.
The1984RevisedThirdEditionofTheShorterOxfordEnglishDictionaryprovides
thefollowingdefinition:
[1.Aninscriptionplacedonoroveranobject,givingitsnameordescribing
it;alegend;2.Thedescriptiveheadingofeachsectionorsubdivisionofa
book(nowonlyinlaw-books);theformalheadingofalegaldocument;3.
thenameofabook,poem,orother(written)composition;aninscriptionat
thebeginningofabook,describingorindicatingitssubject,contentsor
nature,andusuallygivingalsothenameoftheauthor,compiler,oreditor,
andofthepublisher,andtheplaceanddateofpublication;also=TITLE-
PAGE.Also,thedesignationofapictureorstatute.]
The1981RevisedThirdEditionofWebster’sNewCollegiateDictionarydefines
“title”as,amongstotherthings:“5a:thedistinguishingnameofawritten,
printed,orfilmproductionb:asimilardistinguishingnameofamusical
compositionoraworkofart.”
The1993RevisedEditionofLePetitRobert,foritspart,givesthefollowing
explanation:“IV°(Désignationd’unsujet.)1.Désignationdusujettraité(dans
unlivre);nomdonné(àuneoeuvrelittéraire)parsonauteur,etquiévoque
plusoumoinsclairementsoncontenu.(…)2.Nomd’untexte,d’uneœuvre.
3.Expression,phrase,généralementengroscaractères,quiprésenteun
articledejournal.”
Insubsection27(2)(d)oftheCopyrightAct,forinstance,theword“title”isto
beunderstoodas“thetitlepage”ratherthanthenameofthecollection.

$

Furthermore,forthepurposeofsubsection2(25),“title”shouldnotbe
construedasthelegaljustificationtothepossessionofpropertyaswasthe
case,forinstance,inHarrisv.CanadianMusicSalesCorp.(1941),1FoxPat.C.
128,MiddletonJ.at129(Ont.C.A.).
§5.4.2Notaworkbyitself
Doesthetitleofaworkconstituteaworkseparateandindependentfromthe
workitnames?
Atfirstglance,theuseoftheextensive“includes”inthedefinitionof“work”
wouldleadonetobelievethata“title”isonekindof“work”,subjectto
protectionofitsownas,forinstance,booksorcomputerprograms.
Itisnowsettledlawthat,ingeneral,ameretitleisnot,byitself,theproper
subject-matterofcopyrightindependentoftheworktowhichitrelates:see
Francis,Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.(1939),[1940]A.C.
112,WrightJ.at124-125(P.C.).Infact,“work”isnotdefinedasincluding
“titles”butratherasincluding“titlethereof”,thoughmakingreferencetothe
workitself.
Furthermore,foratitletobeprotectedaspartoftheworkitnames,suchtitle
wouldhavetobe“originalanddistinctive”:seeFlamandv.SociétéRadio-
Canada(1967),53C.P.R.217,ReidJ.at224(Que.Sup.Ct.).
Itdoesnotmean,however,thatcopyrightprotectionmaynot,inproper
circumstances,extendtotitlesbyitself:seeCCHCanadianLtd.v.
ButterworthsCanadaLtd.,(1991),[1992]1F.C.3,CullenJ.at20(F.C.T.D.).As
putbyWrightJ.inFrancis,Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.
(1939),[1940]A.C.112,at123(P.C.):“atitlemaynotbeonsoextensivea
scale,andofsoimportantacharacter,astobepropersubjectofprotection
againstbeingcopied”.Insupportofsuchanassertion,WrightJ.made
specificreferencetoDickv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76(C.A.)whereJesselJ.
statedat89,thattheremightbecopyrightinatitle“as,forinstance,ina
wholepageoftitleorsomethingofthatkindrequiringinvention”.
Suchanapproachfavouringquantityoverqualityhasbeenharshlycriticized
byMAYRAND(Albert),Respectautitredel’oeuvrelittéraire(1957),27Revue
duBarreau49:
C’estattacherbeaucoupd’importanceàlaquantitéetenaccordertrop
peuàlaqualité.Lemalheureuxauteurquisefendd’untitred’unepage
estprécisémentceluiquimanqued’espritinventifetd’imagination.Son
titre,quin’exciterapaslaconvoitisedespiratesdelalittérature,n’apas



besoindelaprotectiondelaloi.Qu’ilserassure,personnen’éprouverala
tentationdeviolersondroitd’auteur.
UtilisantlanormedeSirGeorgeJessel[inDicksv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76
(Ch.D.),atp.89],ondevait[inFrancis,Day&HunterLtd.v.Twentieth
CenturyFoxCorporation(1939),[1940]A.C.112(J.C.P.C.)],trouvertrop
courtletitreThemanwhobrokethebankatMonteCarlo!Onpourrait
plutôtluireprochersalongueuretluipréférerParisCanaille[inFerrév.
OcéanFilms(1956),[1956]2J.C.P.9354(C.A.Paris,1rechambre–
1956.05.30)]commecompositionlittéraire.Deuxmotsetuntraitd’union
peuventcontenirplusdesubstancelittéraireetévoquerplusd’idéesou
d’imagesqueletitremastodonted’unepage.[atp.53]
Isolerletitre,c’estdécapiterl’œuvre,doncluifairesubirunemutilation
majeure.L’importanced’unemutilationnesemesurepasauxdimensions
dumembreamputé.Surcepoint,Abélardnepartagepasl’avisdeSir
GeorgeJessel.[atp.55]
Alsotheinterpretationgiventotheamendeddefinitionofworkseemsto
stultifytheobviouslegislativeintention.Ifasubstantialpartofaworkistakenit
seemstomatterlittlewhetherthetitleisalsotakenornot.Whereastakingthe
titleofaworkwithouttakinganythingelsemightcauseseriousdamage.The
pointishowevernowuptoparliament:EditorialNote(1939),9FortnightlyLaw
Journal131.
Morerecently,inExxonCorporationv.ExxonInsuranceConsultants
InternationalLtd.,(1981),[1982]R.P.C.69(Ch.D.),GrahamJ.at79expressed
hisdoubtsastotheunqualifiedapplicationofaprincipletheresultofwhich
wouldbethatatitle,asamatteroflaw,wouldnever,inanycircumstances,
bethesubjectofcopyright;seealsoZlatav.LeverBrothersLtd.,[1948]C.S.
459,SalvasJ.(Que.Sup.Ct.);contraBritishColumbiav.Mihaljevic(1989),26
C.P.R.(3d)184,MacdonellJ.at190(B.C.S.C.).
However,asthelawstands,titles,slogans,phrasesandadvertisementlines
aregenerallyconsideredasunsubstantialworks,notattractingperse
copyrightprotection.AswrittenbyRICKETSON(Stanley),TheLawof
IntellectualProperty(Melbourne,LawBook,1984),atno.5.61:
Copyrightwillnotusuallybeheldtosubsistinworkswhichare
“insubstantial”.Thedenialofprotectioninsuchcasesseemstobebasedon
ademinimisrule,althoughthereisalsoconsiderationthatcopyrightina
phraseorsinglewordmayintrudetoomuchontherightsofthepublic.An
alternative,thoughperhapscomplementary,explanationisthatsuchwork
lacksoriginality.
§5.4.3Categorizationoftitles



AsexpressedbySTERLING(J.A.L.)etal.,CopyrightLawintheUnitedKingdom,
1sted.(London,LegalBooks,1986),no.747,atp.534:

Inthecontextoftitlesofpublications,threecategoriesmaybe
distinguished:
1.descriptivetitlesdescribingthenatureofthebookorthesubject
treated,e.g.FrenchCathedrals,BillsofExchange,
2.fancytitlescontaininganelementofimagination,e.g.TheLord
oftheRings,
3.descriptivetitleswithanelementoffancy,e.g.Lifeassurance
fromProposaltoPolicy,wherethereis“atitleelementof
variationfromthestrictlynecessarydescriptionofthecontents
ofthebookwhichgivesittheelementoffancy”(perMaugham
J.inMathiesonv.SirIsaacPitman&SonsLtd.(1930)47R.P.C.
541,atp.550).
§5.4.4Originalanddistinctive
Quuntitresanscachetdindividualitépropre,etdontlempruntnestpoint
denatureàfaireprendrelechangeaupublicetàporterpréjudiceà
louvrageauquelilaétéprimitivementattribué,nedonnepointdroitàsa
possessionexclusive;
-Auguste-CharlesRENOUARD,Traitédesdroitsd©auteursdansla
litérature,lessciencesetlesbeaux-arts(Paris,JulesRenouardetCie,
1839),tomesecond,p.128,no.56.
Thedefinitionof“work”providesforthecopyrightprotectionofatitle,aspart
oftheworkitnames,inasmuchassuchtitleis:(i)original;and(ii)distinctive.
NeitheroriginalitynordistinctivityisdefinedintheCopyrightAct.
Underthegeneralrule(seediscussionundersection2definitionof“every
original…work”),foratitletobeoriginal,itshouldsufficethatitwasnot
copiedfromanotherwork:seeFrancis,Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCentury
FoxCorp.(1939),[1940]A.C.112(J.C.P.C.—Canada),WrightJ.at124.
Surprisinglyenough,however,itwasrepeatedlyheldthat,eventhough
emanatingfromitsauthor(i.e.,notcopiedfromelsewhere),atitlethatis
purelydescriptivewouldnotbeconsideredasoriginal:see,amongstothers,
Flamandv.SociétéRadio-Canada(1967),53C.P.R.217(Que.Sup.Ct.),Reid
J.at224,andRochatv.SociétéRadio-Canada,[1974]C.S.638(Que.Sup.
Ct.),ArchambaultJ.at7-8ofthefulltext.
Fromareviewofthecaselaw,itwouldseemthatwithrespecttotitles,the
originalityrequiredishigherthanforotherworkssincesomethinginthelikeof
noveltyorinventivenessappearstoberequested:astotherequirementof



“inventiveoriginality”,seeRICKETSON(Stanley),TheLawofIntellectual
Property(Melbourne,LawBook,1984),atnos.5.62-5.63.
Astowhatconstitutesa“distinctive”title,WrightJ.statedinFrancis,Day&
HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.(1939),[1940]A.C.112(J.C.P.C.—
Canada)at124:“Itis,however,difficulttodefinesatisfactorilytheword
“distinctive,”sinceitcannotmeanmerelythatthetitleisusedtoidentifythe
particularwork”.
UsefulreferencecouldthenbemadetotheTrade-MarksAct(R.S.C.1985,c.
T-13,section2)whichdefines“distinctive”inthefollowingmanner:“
‘distinctive’,inrelationtoatrade-mark,meansatrade-markthatactually
distinguishesthewaresorservicesinassociationwithwhichitisusedbyits
ownerfromthewaresorservicesofothersorisadaptedsotodistinguish
them”.Foratitletobedistinctive,itwouldseemthatsuchatitleshouldnot
constituteasimpledescriptionorsummaryoftheworkbutshouldbeofsuch
anaturetodistinguishoneparticularworkfromthoseofothers.
§5.4.5Effectofcopyrightregistration
Pursuanttoparagraph55(2)(d),anapplicationforcopyrightregistration
shouldindicatethetitleoftheworkforwhichregistrationissought.The
certificateofcopyrightisobtainedunderatitlethatidentifiestheworkand
coversthecontentofthework;itdoesnotmeanthatthecertificateof
registrationcoversthetitleoftheworkalone,apartfromtheworkitnames:
Bowmanv.Epstein,[1937]2D.L.R.555(Ont.H.C.),GreeneJ.at556.
Mereregistrationofaworkgivesnorighttotheexclusiveuseofthetitleunder
whichtheworkisregistered:seeMaxwellv.Hogg(1867),2Ch.App.307
(C.A.),CairnsJ.at317-318;LicensedVictuallers’NewspaperCo.v.Bingham
(1888),38Ch.D.139(C.A.),CottonJ.at142andLindleyJ.at143.
§5.5Slogansandheadings
Generally,inviewoftheirprimafacie“unsubstantiality”,slogans,headings,
advertisementlinesandthelikewillnotbeconsideredasdeservingcopyright
protection.Forinstance,“BeautyIsaSocialNecessity,notaLuxury”and
“YouthfulAppearancesareSocialNecessitiesnotLuxuries”wereheldtoo
slighttoconstituteanoriginalwork:Sinanidev.LaMaisonKosmeo(1928),44
T.L.R.574(C.A.);seealsoKirkv.J.&R.FlemingLtd.(1929),[1928-1935]MacG.
Cop.Cas.44(Ch.D.).ButinLadbroke(Football)Ltd.v.WilliamHill(Football)
Ltd.,[1964]1AllE.R.465(H.L.),HodsonJ.at476statesthatthereisno

’

prohibitionwithrespecttotheprotectionofheadingsundertheCopyright
Act(whichdecision,however,isdistinguishableasthedebatewasfocused
oncompilationsratherthanmeretitles).
§5.6BerneConvention
ThesubjectmatterofprotectedworksundertheBerneConventionisprimarily
foundinthedefinitionof“literaryandartisticsworks”atArticle2(1)thereof,
whichreadspartlyasfollows:
Theexpression“literaryandartisticworks”shallincludeeveryproductionin
theliterary,scientificandartisticdomain,whateverbethemodeorformof
itsexpression,suchasbooks,pamphletsandotherwritings(…).[Emphasis
added.]

Thisdefinitionisfollowedbyanextensivelistofcategoriesofworksinwhich
“titles”isnotincluded.Therefore,foratitletobeprotectedundertheBerne
Conventionitmustfalleitherunderthegeneralheading“productioninthe
literarydomain”orundertheillustrative“otherwritings”.
Theavailabilityofcopyrightprotectionfortitleswasdiscussed,buttonoavail.
ThelastefforttoincludesuchaprotectionundertheBerneConventionwas
madeattheBrusselsConferenceof1948bywayoftheproposed
introductionofanArticle15biswhichreadasfollows:
Atitleofaliteraryorartisticwork,whichpresentsadistinctivecharacter,
maynotbeutilisedbyathirdpartytodesignateanotherwork,ifthis
designationisofsuchanatureastocauseconfusionbetweenthetwo
works.
Suchaproposal,however,wasnotacceptedeitherbecauseofsome
“reluctancetoincludeanon-copyrighttypeofmeasureinaninternational
conventionconcernedwiththeprotectionofauthor’srights”orpractical
considerationresultingfromtheabsenceofregistrationsystemtoinformthe
authorsoftheavailabilityofaparticulartitle:seeRICKETSON(Sam),TheBerne
ConventionfortheProtectionofLiteraryandArtisticWorks;1886-1986
(London,CentreforCommercialLawStudies,1987),no.6.81,atp.313.
Therefore,despitetheirstrongcommercialvalue,titlesandslogansarenot
protectedassuchundertheBerneConvention.AssummarizedbyLADAS
(StephenP.),TheInternationalProtectionofLiteraryandArtisticProperty,in
HarvardStudiesinInternationalLawNo.3(NewYork,Macmillan,1938),Vol.1,
no.242,atpp.242-243:
ThereisnoprovisionintheConventionconcerningtheprotectionoftitlesof
worksprotectedthereunder.Insofarasthesearesufficientlylengthyand
maybedeemedtohaveinvolvedlabourandchoiceinconstruction,they
are“writings”includedinthecategoryof“otherwritings”ofthefirst

&

paragraphofArticle2.Otherwise,theprotectionoftitlesisaquestiontobe
governedbythelawsofeachcountry.Inmanycountriesprotectionmay
beobtainedundertheprovisionsofthelawagainstunfaircompetition,
wheneverlikelihoodofconfusionbythepubliccanbeestablished.

AstotheapplicabilityoftheBerneConventionassuchinCanada,see
section91.
§5.7OtherProtectionforTitles
Queletitredunouvrage,destinéàassurersonindividualitéetàla
manifesteraupublic,nedoitpas
treusurpé,m
mepour
tredonnéàun
ouvrageduncontenudifférent;quilyausurpation,m
melorsquilestfaità
cetitredesmodificationsinsignifiantesquilaissentconsulterleschancesde
confusionetdeméprise;
-Auguste-CharlesRENOUARD,Traitédesdroitsd©auteursdansla
litérature,lessciencesetlesbeaux-arts(Paris,JulesRenouardetCie,
1839),tomesecond,p.127,no.56.
Apartfromthecopyrightlaw,misappropriationorothermisuseofthetitleofa
workcouldberestrainedasconstitutingtrade-markencroachmentorunfair
competition.
§5.7.1Trade-marks
Foratitletobeprotectedasatrade-markundertheTrade-MarksAct,(R.S.C.
1985,c.T-13),suchatitleshouldfunctionasatrade-markanddistinguishthe
wares(i.e.,theworkoritscopies)ofitsowner(whomaybesomeoneelse
thantheauthororcopyrightowner)fromthewaresorservicesofothers:see
definitionof“trade-mark”undersection2ofthatAct.
Aword,design,letter,number,sign,orcombinationthereofmayconstitutea
trade-mark.However,tobeconsideredasatrade-mark,itdoesnothaveto
beregisteredassuch,anditsuseasatrade-markwillgenerallysuffice.
However,foratrade-marktoberegistrable,itwillhavetomeetthe
requirementsofsubsection12(1)oftheTrade-MarksAct,whichreads:

Subjecttosection13,atrade-markisregistrableifitisnot
(a)awordthatisprimarilymerelythenameorthesurnameofan
individualwhoislivingorhasdiedwithintheprecedingthirtyyears;
(b)whetherdepicted,writtenorsounded,eitherclearlydescriptiveor
deceptivelymisdescriptiveintheEnglishorFrenchlanguageofthe
characterorqualityofthewaresorservicesinassociationwithwhich

%

itisusedorproposedtobeusedoroftheconditionsoforthepersons
employedintheirproductionoroftheirplaceoforigin;
(c)thenameinanylanguageofanyofthewaresorservicesin
connectionwithwhichitisusedorproposedtobeused;
(d)confusingwitharegisteredtrade-mark;
(e)amarkofwhichtheadoptionisprohibitedbysection9or10;
(f)adenominationtheadoptionofwhichisprohibitedbysection10.1;
(g)inwholeorinpartaprotectedgeographicalindication,wherethe
trade-markistoberegisteredinassociationwithawinenot
originatinginaterritoryindicatedbythegeographicalindication;and
(h)inwholeorinpartaprotectedgeographicalindication,wherethe
trade-markistoberegisteredinassociationwithaspiritnotoriginating
inaterritoryindicatedbythegeographicalindication.

Moreover,thetrade-markmustnotcreateconfusionwithatrade-markora
tradenamepreviouslyused,madeknownorappliedforinCanada.Pursuant
tosubsections6(2)and6(3)theuseofatrade-markcausesconfusionwitha
trade-markoratradenameiftheuseofbothtrade-marksorboththetrade-
markandthetradenameinthesameareawouldbelikelytoleadtothe
inferencethatthewaresorservicesassociatedwithsuchtrade-marksorwith
suchtrade-markandthoseassociatedwiththebusinesscarriedonunder
suchtradenamearemanufactured,sold,leased,hiredorperformedbythe
sameperson,whetherornotsuchwaresorservicesareofthesamegeneral
class.
Forinstance,thetrade-mark“theCanadianJewishReview”,asappliedtoa
periodicalpublication,washeldnon-registrableasclearlydescriptiveinthe
Englishlanguageofthecharacterofthewareswithwhichitwasused:
CanadianJewishReviewLtd.v.Canada(RegistrarofTradeMarks)(1961),37
C.P.R.89,CameronJ.at93(Ex.Ct.).Thetrade-mark“FinishingEngineer”as
thetitleofaperiodicalworkwasheldclearlydescriptiveofthecontentand
natureofthepublicationandtheapplicationforregistrationwasrefused:
Assn.ofProfessionalEngineersv.Canada(RegistrarofTradeMarks),[1959]Ex.
C.R.354,FournierJ.(Ex.Ct.).Bythesametoken,thetrade-mark“True
Confessions”asappliedtomagazineswasheldunregistrableanditsrelated
registrationexpunged:FawcettPublicationsInc.v.Valentine,[1950]Ex.C.R.
246,CameronJ.at250(Ex.Ct.).Similarly,theregistrationofthetrade-mark
“Today’sParent”inrelationtoamagazinewasexpungedasdescriptiveofa
magazinedealingwithparenthood:seeProfessionalPublishingLtd.v.Toronto
ParentMagazine(1986),9C.P.R.(3d)207,StrayerJ.atp.216(F.C.T.D.).
Whileitcangenerallybesaidthatthetitleofaworkmaydistinguishthiswork
fromotherworks,itmaynotbeaseasilysaidthatthetitlewilldistinguishthe
wares(forinstance,abook)fromacompetitor’swares(forinstance,another
bookwhichcouldbearthesametitle).See,however,CanadianOlympic

(

Assn./OlympiqueCanadiennev.KonicaCanadaInc.(1991),39C.P.R.(3d)
400,HugessenJ.at405(F.C.A.).
Therightsconferredbyatrade-markundertheTrade-marksActaresetforth
insections19,20,22and7thereof.See,generally:FOX(HaroldGeorge),The
CanadianLawofTradeMarksandUnfairCompetition,3rded.(Toronto,
Carswell,1972)andRICHARD(HughesG.)etal.,Robic-Leger’sTradeMarkAct
Annotated(Toronto,DeBoo,1984).
§5.7.2Passingoff
Finally,apartfromtrade-markregistration,ifaplaintiffcouldestablishthatits
trade-mark,throughuseinCanada,hasacquiredasecondaryand
distinctivemeaningorthatthedefendanthaspassedofforattemptedto
passoffhiswaresforthoseoftheplaintiff,thenaclaimforpassingoffmay
prevailevenifthetitleoftheworkisotherwisedescriptive.
AsexpressedbyDRYSDALE(John)etal.,PassingOffLawandPractice
(London,Butterworths,1986),atno.9.24:“Therightsrelatingtothetitleofa
literaryworkarisingunderthelawofpassingoffarewhollyseparateand
distinctfromthecopyrightintheworkitselfandindeedtheserightsmay
belongtodifferentpeople”.
See,generally:FOX(HaroldGeorge),TheCanadianLawofTradeMarksand
UnfairCompetition,3rded.(Toronto,Carswell,1972),atpp.539-551with
respecttopassingoffbycopyingthetitlesofliteraryandartisticworksand
WADLOW(Christopher),TheLawofPassing-Off(London,Sweet&Maxwell,
1990),atnos.6.35-6.38.
§5.7.3Illustrations:injunctiongranted
1.“TheWonderfulMagazine”magazine
“TheWonderfulMagazine—NewServicesImproved”magazine
Hoggv.Kerby(1803),8Ves.215,EldonJ.(Ch.)

2.“Minnie”popularsong
“Minnie”popularsong
Chappelv.Sheard(1855)2K.&J.117,WoodJ.(Ch.)
3.“TheBritannia”weeklynewspaper
“TrueBritannia”weeklynewspaper
Prowettv.Mortimer(1856)4W.R.519,StuartJ.(Ch.)

)

4.“Bell’sLife”newspaper
“PennyBell’sLifeandSportingNews”newspaper
Clementv.Maddick(1859),1Giff.98,StuartJ.(Ch.)
5.“TheLondonJournal”weeklynewspaper
“TheDailyLondonJournal”weeklynewspaper
Ingramv.Stiff(1859),5Jur.947(C.A.)

6.“TheBirthdayScriptureText-Book”book
“TheChildren’sBirthdayText-Book”book
Mackv.Petter(1872),41L.J.Ch.781,RomillyJ.(Ch.D.)

7.“Hemy’sRoyalModernTutorforthePianoforte”musicalcompositions
“Hemy’sNewandRevisedEditionofJousse’sRoyalStandard
PianoforteTutor”musicalcompositions
Metzlerv.Wood(1877),8Ch.D.606(C.A.)

8.“TrialandTriumph”book(novel)
“TrialandTriumph”book(novel)
Weldonv.Dicks(1878),27W.R.639,MalinsJ.(Ch.D.)

9.“Beatty’sHead-lineCopyBook”book
“Beatty’sNewandImprovedHead-lineCopyBook”book
CanadianPublishingCo.v.Gage(1885),11S.C.R.306

10.“TheCommercialTravellerandMercantileJournal”knownas“The
CommercialTraveller”newspaper
“TheTraveller”Journal”
Careyv.Goss(1886),11O.R.619,GaltJ.(Ch.D.)
11.“ChurchandState”weeklynewspaper
“ChurchandState”weeklynewspaper
PrimrosePressAgencyCo.v.Knowles(1886),2T.L.R.404,(Ch.D.)Kay
J.

12.“TheCanadianBooksellerandLibraryJournal”tradejournal
“TheCanadaBooksellerandStationer”tradejournal
Rosev.McCleanPublishingCo.(1897),24O.A.R.240(C.A.)

13.“TheWrongMr.Wright”play
“TheWrongMrs.Wright”play
Broadhurstv.Nicholls(1903),3S.R.(N.S.W.)147,SimpsonJ.(S.C.)

”

14.“BlueBird”play
“L’OiseauBleu(TheBlueBird)Valse”dancemusic
Elkin&Co.v.FrancisDay&Hunter(1910),[1905-10]MacG.Cop.Cas.
294,EveJ.(Ch.D.)

15.“TheOddVolume”annualpublication
“TheMonthlyOddVolume”monthlymagazine
Aldenv.Arnsby-Wilson,[1911-16]MacG.Cop.Cas.13,WarringtonJ.
(Ch.D.)

16.“SealedOrders”play
“SealedOrders”cinematographfilm
(defendanttochangeitstitleto“OrderunderSeal”)
Raleighv.KinematographTradingCo.(1914),[1911-16]MacG.Cop.
Cas.185,EveJ.(Ch.D.)

17.“TheRacingPigeon”periodical
“TheRacingPigeonWorld”periodical
(defendanttochangeitstitleto“thePigeonRacingWorld”)
RacingPigeonPublishingCo.v.Watson,[1917-23]MacG.Cop.Cas.
117,PetersonJ.(Ch.D.)

18.“Dawn”movie
“Dawn”and“AtDawn”stageplay
British&DominionFilmCorp.v.FredD’AlbertRepertoryCo.,(1928),
[1923-28]MacG.Cop.Cas.346,ClausonJ.(Ch.D.)

19.“TopHat”magazine
“TopHat”magazine
(injunctiondeniedastocopyright,butgrantedastotrade-mark)
Bowmanv.Epstein,[1937]2D.L.R.804(Ont.C.A.)

20.“ThisManisDangerous”novel
“ThisManisDangerous”film
Cheyneyv.RialtoProductionsLtd.(1941),[1936-45]MacG.Cop.Cas.
386,OliverJ.(K.B.D.)

21.“Anniegetyourgun”foraplay
“Anniegetyourfun”foraplay
LouisDreyfussW.R.ProductionsLtd.v.Henry’sProductionsLtd.(1949),
[1950]63D.A.56(Ch.Div.)

22.“Anastasia”filmofaplay
“Anastasia”film

$

(Injunctiongrantedbutuseunderconditionsofthetitle“IsAnna
AndersonAnastasia?(Thisisnotafilmoftheplay)”permitted)
TwentiethCenturyFoxFilmCorp.v.GalaFilmDistributorsLtd.,[1957]
R.P.C.105,RoxburghJ.(Ch.D.)

23.“MyLifeandLoves”book
“FrankHarris:MyLifeandAdventures”book
W.H.Allen&Co.v.BrownWatsonLtd.,[1965]R.P.C.191,PennycuikJ.
(Ch.D.)

24.“OxfordDictionaries”dictionaries
“ThePergamonOxfordDictionaryofPerfectSpelling”and“Pergamon
Oxford”dictionaries
OxfordUniversityv.PergamonPressLtd.(1977),121Sol.Jo.758(C.A.)

25.“Liberté”monthlymagazine
“Libertémagazine”monthlymagazine
CollectifLibertéInc.v.Liberté-MagazineLteé(1980),J.E.80-277,
DeslongchampsJ.(Que.Sup.Ct.)

26.“FuNuiSunTsz”/“NewLooksofWomen”televisionprogramme
“FuNuiSunTsz”/“Lady”magazine
TelevisionBroadcastsLtd.v.HomeGuidePublicationCo.,[1982]F.S.R.
505,MacdougallJ.(HongKongH.C.)

27.“What’sNewIn…”magazines
“What’sNewInTraining”magazines
Morgan-Grampianplcv.TrainingPersonnelLtd.(1991),[1992]F.S.R.
267,MummeryJ.(Ch.D.)

28.“DarkFuture”forpaperbackfuturisticnovels
“DarkFuture”forpaperbackfuturisticnovels
GamesWorkshopLtd.v.TransworldPublishersLtd.(1993),[1994]20
F.S.R.705(C.A.)

29.“Almanachdupeuple”forabook
“Almanachdupeuple”forabook
GroupePolygone-ÉditeursInc.v.SernaCommunicationsInc.*(1994),
59C.P.R.(3d)449(Que.Sup.Ct.—InterimInjunction)BishopJ.(1994),
J.E.95-118(Que.Sup.Ct.—Merits)HeslerJ.

30.“PracticalClassics”foramonthlycarmagazine“Classics”fora
monthlycarmagazineEmapNationalPublicationsLimitedv.Security
PublicationsLimited(1997),[1997]F.S.R.891(Ch.Div.)



§5.7.4Illustrations:injunctiondenied

1.“ThePictorialAlmanacFor1847”almanac
“OldMoore’sPictorialAlmanacfor1847”almanac
Spottiswoodev.Clarke(1841),2Ph.153,CottenhamJ.(Ch.)

2.“Belgravia”magazine
“Belgravia”magazine
Maxwellv.Hogg(1867),2Ch.App.307(C.A.)

3.“Punch”weeklycomicjournal
“PunchandJudy”weeklycomicjournal
Bradburyv.Beeton(1869),18W.R.33,MalinsJ.(Ch.D.)

4.“TheIllustratedFurnishingGuide”catalogue
“F.Woodward&Co.’sIllustratedFurnishingGuide”and“New
FurnishingGuide”catalogue
Cobbettv.Woodward(1872),41L.J.Ch.656,RomillyJ.(Ch.D.)

5.“PostOfficeDirectoryofWestRidingofYorkshire”directory
“PostOffice”and“PostOfficeBradfordDirectory”directory
Kellyv.Byles(1879),13Ch.D.682,BaconJ.(Ch.D.)

6.“SplendidMisery”tale
“SplendidMisery”tale
Dicksv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76(C.A.)

7.“TheMail”newspaper
“TheMorningMail”newspaper
Walterv.Emmott(1885),54L.J.Ch.1059(C.A.)

8.“TheCastleAlbum“photographalbum
“TheCastleAlbum“photographalbum
Schovev.Schminké(1886),55L.J.Ch.892,ChittyJ.(Ch.D.)

9.“TheMorningPost”dailynewspaper
“TheEveningPost”dailynewspaper
Borthwickv.EveningPost(1888),37Ch.D.449(C.A.)

10.“TheLicensedVictuallers’Mirror”weeklynewspaper
“TheLicensedVictuallers’Mirror”weeklynewspaper



LicensedVictuallers’NewspaperCo.v.Bingham(1888),38Ch.D.139
(C.A.)

11.“CosmopolitanSleeveChart”charts
“CosmopolitanSleeveChart”charts
Hollinrakev.Truswell,[1894]3Ch.420(C.A.)

12.“TheEveningExpress”newspaper
“TheNorthExpress”newspaper
Dillonv.Pearson,(1901),[1901-04]MacG.Cop.Cas.17,BuckleyJ.(Ch.
D.)

13.“TheField,TheFarm,TheGarden,TheCountyGentleman’s
Newspaper”knownas“TheField”magazine
“TheFieldandKennel”magazine
Coxv.SportsPublishingCo.(1902),[1901-04)MacG.Cop.Cas.27,
FarwellJ.(Ch.D.)

14.“ThePlumberandDecorator”and“TheDecorators’andPainters’
Magazine”magazines
“TheDecorator”magazine
DaleReynolds&Co.v.TradePapersPublishingCo.(1902),[1901-04]
MacG.Cop.Cas.32,FarwellJ.(Ch.D.)

15.“M.A.P.”—“MainlyAboutPeople”periodical
“P.T.O.”—“PeopleTalkedOf”periodical
C.ArthurPearsonLtd.v.O’Connor,(1906),[1905-10]MacG.Cop.Cas.
43,JoyceJ.(Ch.D.)

16.“Ewen’sCurrentStampQuotations”catalogue
“CurrentQuotationsforKing’sHead,&c.,ColonialStamps,aGuideto
theValueofModernColonialStamps”catalogue
Ewen’sColonialStampMarketLtd.v.FederalStampCo.(1907),[1905-
10]MacG.Cop.Cas.78,PhillimoreJ.(K.B.D.)

17.“CottageHomesofEngland”politicalhandbook
“CottageHomesofEngland”architecturalbook
Crotchv.Arnold(1909),54Sol.Jo.49,SwinfenEadyJ.(Ch.D.)

18.“EveningTimes”eveningnewspaper
“EveningTimes”eveningnewspaper
GeorgeOutram&Co.v.LondonEveningNewspapersCo.,(1911),
[1911-16]MacG.Cop.Cas.5,WarringtonJ.(Ch.D.)



19.“OurSailorKing”biography
“OurSailorKing”biography
JohnF.Shaw&Co.v.WilliamCollins,Sons&Co.,(1911),[1911-16]
MacG.Cop.Cas.14,WarringtonJ.(Ch.D.)

20.“WherethereisaWillThere’saWay”play
“Wherethere’saWill”play
Broemelv.Meyer,(1912),[1911-16]MacG.Cop.Cas.56,WarringtonJ.
(Ch.D.)

21.“MonthlyMagazineofFiction”magazine
“Cassell’smagazineofFictionandPopularLiterature”magazine
WilliamStevensLtd.v.Cassell&Co.(1913),29T.L.R.272(Ch.D.)

22.“TheNewCanadianBirdBook”book
“TheNewCanadianBirdBook”book
McIndoov.MussonBookCo.(1916),35O.L.R.342(C.A.)

23.“Adventure”magazine
“Hutchinson’sAdventureStoryMagazine”magazine
RidgwayCo.v.Hutchinson&Co.,(1923),[1917-23]MacG.Cop.Cas.
396,SargantJ.(Ch.D.)

24.“Hazlitt’sSelectedEssays”book
“Hazlitt’sSelectedEssays,EditionHollingworth”book
CambridgeUniversityPressv.UniversityTutorialPress(1928),45R.P.C.
335,MaughamJ.(Ch.D.)

25.“HowtoAppealAgainstyourRatesintheMetropolis”and“Howto
AppealAgainstyourRatesoutsidetheMetropolis”books
“HowtoAppealAgainstyourRatesWithintheMetropolis”and“How
toAppealAgainstyourRatesWithouttheMetropolis”books
Mathiesonv.SirIsaacPitman&Sons,Ltd.(1930),47R.P.C.541,
MaughamJ.(Ch.D.)

26.“TheYoungerGeneration”stageplay
“TheYoungerGeneration”cinematographfilm
Houghtonv.FilmBookingOfficesLtd.(1931),48R.P.C.329,BennettJ.
(Ch.D.)

27.“IrishandProudofIt”musicalplay
“IrishandProudofIt”film
O’Gormanv.ParamountFilmServiceLtd.,[1937]2AllE.R.113,Clauson
J.(Ch.D.)

’

28.“Who’sWhoinCanada”book
“TheCanadianWho’sWho”book
InternationalPressLtd.v.Tunnell,(1937),[1938]1D.L.R.393(Ont.C.A.)

29.“TheManWhoBrokeTheBankatMonteCarlo”song
“TheManWhoBrokeTheBankatMonteCarlo”film
Francis,Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.,(1939),
[1940]A.C.112(P.C.)

30.“SawingaWomaninHalf”illusionact
“Theworld-famousillusion,SawingaWomaninHalf”illusionact
Lylev.LondonSocietyofMagicians(1943),[1936-45]MacG.Cop.Cas.
409,UthwattJ.(Ch.D.)

31.“Anniegetyourgun”theatrical
“Fannygetyourgun”theatrical
LouisDreyfussW.R.ProductionsLtd.v.Hinge’sProductionLtd.(1949),
[1950]D.A.56(Ch.)

32.“TrueConfessions”
“StartlingConfessions”and“SensationalCrimesConfessions”
periodical(magazines)
Injunctiondenied(Passingoffandtrademarkinfringement)
FawcettPublicationsInc.v.Valentine,[1950]Ex.C.R.246(Ex.Ct.)

33.“LondonWeeklyAdvertiser”and“NationalAdvertiser”weeklypapers
“NationalWeekly”weeklypaper
BritainPublishingCo.(London)Ltd.v.Trade&CommercialPressLtd.,
[1957]R.P.C.271,HarmanJ.(Ch.D.)

34.“SportsCarandLotusOwner”magazine
“SportsCarsIllustrated”magazine
PearlCooperLtd.v.RichmondHillPressLtd.,[1957]R.P.C.363,Upjohn
J.(Ch.D.)

35.“Today”magazine
“Today,TheNewJohnBull”magazine
NormanKarkPublicationsLtd.v.OdhamsPressLtd.,(1960),[1962]1
W.L.R.380,WilberforceJ.(Ch.D.)

36.“RubberandPlasticsAge”tradejournal
“RubberandPlasticsWeekly”tradejournal

&

Rubber&TechnicalPressLtd.v.MacLawn&SonsLtd.,[1961]R.P.C.
264,CrossJ.(Ch.D.)

37.“ApassagetoIndia”novel
“E.M.Forster,ApassagetoIndia,Everyman’sGuide”guidebookto
thenovel
Forsterv.Parasuraman,[1964]A.I.R.361(C.A.Madras)

38.“VotreBottinTéléphonique”phonedirectory
“LeNouveauBottinLocal”phonedirectory
BottintéléphoniquedevotrequartierInc.v.NouveaubottinlocalInc.
(unreported)Que.Sup.Ct.-Interlocutory,Doc.No.500-05-695-387-65,
MayrandJ.S.C.,October26,1965

39.“Médecined’aujourd’hui—DoctorToday”televisionseries
“Médecined’aujourd’hui”televisionseries
Flamandv.SociétéRadio-Canada,[1967],Que.S.C.424(Que.S.C.)

40.“TheCricketer”monthlymagazine
“Cricketer”monthlymagazine
TheCricketerLtd.v.NewspressPty.Ltd.,(1973),[1974]V.R.477,KayeJ.
(S.C.Victoria)

41.“TheSundayPost”newspaper
“TheSouthEastSundayPost”newspaper
D.C.Thomson&Co.v.KentMessengerLtd.,(1974),[1975]R.P.C.191,
MegarryJ.(Ch.D.)

42.“MorningStar”newspaper
“DailyStar”newspaper
MorningStarCo-OperativeSocietyLtd.v.ExpressNewspapersLtd.,
(1978),[1979]F.S.R.113,FosterJ.(Ch.D.)

43.“Newsweek”magazine
“Newsweek”televisionprogram
NewsweekInc.v.BritishBroadcastingCorp.,(1978),[1979]R.P.C.441
(C.A.)

44.“AthleticsWeekly”magazine
“AthleticsMonthly”magazine
WorldAthletics&SportingPublicationsLtd.v.ACMWebb(Publishing)
Co.,(1980),[1981]F.S.R.27(C.A.)

45.“LaNouvelle”weeklynewspaper

%

“LaNouvelleduHautSt-François”weeklynewspaper
JournallaNouvelleInc.v.LaNouvelleduHautSt-FrançoisInc.(1980),
J.E.966-78,SavoieJ.(Que.Sup.Ct.)

46.“TheLawyer’sDiary1986”diary
“Butterworth’sLawDiary1986”diary
Rosev.InformationServicesLtd.,(1986),[1987]F.S.R.254,HoffmanJ.
(Ch.D.)

47.“Mothercare”book
“MotherCare/OtherCare”book
MothercareU.K.Ltd.v.PenguinBooksLtd.,[1988]R.P.C.113(C.A.)

48.“Neighbours”televisionseries
“NeighboursWho’swho”magazine
GrundyTelevisionPty.Ltd.v.StartrainLtd.,[1988]F.S.R.581,MillettJ.
(Ch.D.)

49.“OpportunityKnocks”televisionprogram
“OpportunityKnocks”televisionprogram
Greenv.BroadcastingCorp.ofNewZealand,[1989]2AllE.R.1056
(P.C.)

50.“TamworthHerald”and“Herald”weeklynewspaper
“TamworthHeraldandPost”weeklynewspaper
TamworthHeraldCo.v.ThomsonFreeNewspapersLtd.,(1989),[1991]
F.S.R.337,AldousJ.(Ch.D.)

51.“TheGoldAM”radioprogram
“TheGoldAM”radioprogram
CountySoundv.OceanSoundLtd.,(1989),[1991]F.S.R.367(C.A.)

52.“LeisureWeek”magazine
“LeisureNews”magazine
MarcusPublishingplcv.Hutton-WildCommunicationsLtd.,(1989),
[1990]R.P.C.576(C.A.)

53.“Style”forafashiontradeperiodical
“Style”forasectioninadailynewspaper
StyleCommunicationsInc.v.SouthamInc.(1990),39F.T.R.154,Cullen
J.(F.C.T.D.)

54.“ManagementToday”monthlymagazine
“SecurityManagementToday”monthlymagazine

(

ManagementPublicationsLtd.v.BlenheimExhibitionsGroupplc,
[1991]F.S.R.348,HoffmannJ.(Ch.D.)

55.“Gourmet”forafoodmagazine
“BBCGourmetGoodfood”forafoodmagazine
AdvanceMagazinePublishingInc.v.RedwoodPublishingLtd.(1992),
[1993]20F.S.R.449,HarmanJ.(Ch.D.)

56.“TVHebdo/Téléromans”foratelevisionmagazine
“TV7jours/Éditionspécialetéléromans:”foratelevisionmagazine,
Télémédiacommunicationsinc.v.Trustarlimitéeunreportedjudgment
rendered1994.03.08bySévignyJ.,Doc.500-05-011025-837(Que.Sup.
Ct.—Interlocutory).

57.“WetWetWet”populargroupofmusicians
“ASweetLittleMystery—WetWetWet—TheInsideStory”book
BravadoMerchandisingServicesLtd.v.MainstreamPublishing
(Edinburgh)Ltd.(1995),[1996]23F.S.R.205(Ct.ofSession—Scotland)
§6.0CaseLaw
§6.1Canada
1.NewYorkHeraldvOttawaCitizenCo(1909),41S.C.R.229(S.C.C.)
IdingtonJ.:
[Whethertheterms”BusterBrown”or”BusterBrownandTige”foruseas
thetitletoacomicsectionofanewspapercanberegisteredasa
trademarkunderTheTradeMarkandDesignAct,RSC1906,c.71.]
[17]Theproductionwhichtheappellantsellsisnotakindofpaper,orof
papercolouredinanyparticularwayorcoveredwithapeculiarkindofink
orsetformsorfigures.Itisthenonsensethatisproducedbythebrainofthe
manwritingforthediversionoftheidlethatintruthissold.
[18]Itmaybethatkindofbrainproductthatcopyrightmightamongst
otherthingsbeextendedtoorthatcopyrightmightcover.
[19]Iamnot,however,goingtowanderintothefieldofwhetherornota
trademarkcanexistinsuchanameornames,orinthenameofortitle
givenanyliteraryproductionofanykind,forIamquitesureitneverwas
intendedthissectionshouldapplytosuchathing.
[20]Ifitdid,allthatwouldbeneededforapublisherofcopyrightedworks,
whenthecopyrightwasabouttoexpire,inorderpracticallytoaddtwenty-
fiveyearstothetermofcopyright,wouldbetoregisterthetitleanddefy
anyonetouseit,thoughthenatlibertytosellthethingitselfwithoutatitle.

)

[21]Ithinkthedistinctionbetweencopyrightandtrademarkregistration
wasintendedbythelegislaturetobe,andthatitmustbe,observedin
applyingthisAct.

2.McIndoov.MussonBookCo.(1915),35O.L.R.42,MastenJ.(Ont.
H.C.).
Inthiscasethereisnocomplaintthattheliterarycompositionformingthe
bodyofthisworkhasbeeninfringed.Thetwoworksareabsolutelydifferent.
Thecomplaintrelatessolelytothetitle.
InthecaseofDickv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76,LordJucticeJamessaid(p.
93):“Idesiretoaddthatinmyopinion,andIunderstandtheMasterofthe
Rollstohaveexpressedthesameopinion,therecannotingeneralbeany
copyrightinthetitleornameofabook.”
Thisdictumappearstohavebeenacceptedfromthattime,anditis
certainthatunderourstatute,unlessthetitleitselfamountedtoaliterary,
scientific,orartisticworkorcomposition,itcannotformthesubjectof
copyright.
Noonecansuggestthatthewords“TheNewCanadianBirdBook”amount
tosuchaworkorcomposition.Thewordsarepurelyandsimplydescriptive
ofthebook,nothingmoreorless.
Theplaintiffalsoputhiscaseonanotherground,namely,thatthe
defendantissellingitsbookunderthenameortitleoftheplaintiff’swork.
Thisisaphaseoftheordinarydoctrineof“passingoff”usuallytreatedin
connectionwiththelawoftrademarks.
Inordertosucceedinsuchanactiontheplaintiffmustshowthathisbook
hasbecomeknowntothepublicandsoughtforunderthetitleadoptedby
him;toputitinanotherway,thatithasacquiredapublicreputationunder
itstitle.”[atpp.43-44]

3.Bowmanv.Epstein,[1937]2D.L.R.555,GreeneJ.(Ont.H.C.).
Theplaintiffsproduceacertificateofcopyrightinthepublishedliterarywork
entitled“TopHat.”
Inmyopinionthecopyrightcoversthecontentsofthemagazineanddoes
notcoverthename“TopHat”.[atp.556]

4.InternationalPressLtd.v.Tunnell,(1937),[1938]1D.L.R.393,RowellJ.
(Ont.C.A.).
Itisamatterofcommonknowledgethateverywell-equippedpubliclibrary
containsascoreormoreofthesevolumes,allentitled“Who’sWho.”Itis

”

cleartomethatthewords,“Who’sWho”arepublicijuris.Theyarethe
appropriatedescriptivetitleofaparticularformofbiographicaldictionary
ofprominentpeople,andareknownassuchtheworldover.
Itiscontended,however,thatwhilethewords,“Who’sWho”maybe
descriptive,thetitle“Who’sWhoinCanada”isnotdescriptive.Icannot
agree:thewholetitleispurelydescriptive.Itdescribesandproperly
describes,abookcontainingbiographicalsketchesofprominentpeople
livinginCanada.Itisfurthercontendedbytherespondentsthatthese
wordshaveacquiredsecondarymeaningandareknowntothepublicas
therespondents’publication,asdistinguishedfromthepublicationsofother
companies.Itistruethatdescriptivewordsmayacquiresecondary
meaning,butthepartywhoassertssuchaclaimassumesaheavyonusin
tryingtoestablishit.[atp.411]

5.Francis,Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.,(1939),
[1940]A.C.112,WrightJ.(J.C.P.C.-Canada).

[Inthatcasetheplaintiffsclaimedcopyrightinasongentitled“theMan
WhoBroketheBankatMonteCarlo,”andclaimedthattheuseofthose
wordsasthetitleofamotionpicturefilminfringedtheircopyrightinthe
musicalwork.]
Theappellant’scontentionwasputashighasthatcopyrightinatitleis
infringedbytheapplicationofthattitletoaworkofadifferentcharacter
fromthatoftheworktowhichitwasoriginallyapplied.Inthepresentcase
thetitlewasoriginallyappliedtoamusicalcomposition,whereasithas
beenappliedbytherespondentstoamotionpictureorafilm.The
argumentoftheappellantcompanywouldbethesame,itseems,ifthe
applicationofthetitlecomplainedofhadbeentoapictureorastatue.On
thisreasoningitwouldbesaidthatthetitle“Adam”appliedtoaworkof
statuarywouldbeinfringedifthattitlewereusedasthatofanovel.These
andotheranomalousconsequencesjustifythebroadprinciplethatin
generalatitleisnotbyitselfapropersubject-matterofcopyright.Asarule
atitledoesnotinvolveliterarycomposition,andisnotsufficientlysubstantial
tojustifyaclaimtoprotection.Thatstatementdoesnotmeanthatin
particularcasesatitlemaynotbeonsoextensiveascale,andofso
importantacharacter,astobeapropersubjectofprotectionagainst
beingcopied.AsJesselM.R.saidinDicksv.Yates[(1881),18Ch.D.76at89]
(which,asLindleyL.J.saidinLicensedVictuallers’NewspaperCo.v.
Bingham[(1888)38Ch.D.139],virtuallyoverruledonthispointWeldonv.
Dicks[(1878),10Ch.D.247])theremightbecopyrightinatitle“as,for
instance,inawholepageoftitleorsomethingofthatkindrequiring
invention.”Butthiscouldnotbesaidofthefactsinthepresentcase.There
mayhavebeenacertainamount,thoughnotahighdegree,oforiginality
inthinkingofthethemeofthesong,andeveninchoosingthetitle,though
itisofthemostobvious.To“breakthebank”isahackneyedexpression,
andMonteCarlois,orwas,themostobviousplaceatwhichthat
achievementoraccidentmighttakeplace.Thethemeofthefilmis
differentfromthatofthesong,andtheirLordshipsseenogroundin
copyrightlawtojustifytheappellants’claimtopreventtheusebythe
respondentsofthesefewobviouswords,whicharetoounsubstantialto

$

constituteaninfringement,especiallywhenusedinsodifferenta
connection.[atpp.123-124]
Itis,however,difficulttodefinesatisfactorilytheword“distinctive,”sinceit
cannotmeanmerelythatthetitleisusedtoidentifytheparticularwork.In
thisconnectionregardmustbehadtos.3oftheActof1921,whichdefines
copyrightasthe“righttoproduceorreproducetheworkoranysubstantial
partthereof.”Thedefinition(v.)doesnot,intheirLordships’judgment,mean
thatthetitleofaworkistobedeemedaseparateandindependent
“work.”Workistoinclude“thetitlethereof,”thatistosay,thetitleistobe
treatedaspartofthework,provideditisoriginalanddistinctive,whatever
thesewordsmayconnote.Whenthatdefinitionisreadwiths.3,theresultis
thattocopythetitleconstitutesinfringementonlywhenwhatiscopiedisa
substantialpartofthework.Thisviewwouldagreeineffectwithwhatwas
saidbyJesselM.R.inDicksv.Yatesinthewordsquotedabove,andwould
applytoacasesuchasatitlecoveringawholepageoforiginalmatter,or
somethingofthatnature,butwouldnotjustifysuchawideextensionof
copyrightastheappellantcompanyhascontendedfor,ortheholdingof
McEvoyJ.[intheOntarioHighCourt,below]onthispoint.Itissaidthatsoto
construethedefinitionistotreatitasaddingnothingtothelaw.Butthe
definitionmayhavebeeninsertedtosettledoubts,andtoavoiditbeing
saidthatinnocircumstancescouldatitlereceiveprotection.Inanyevent,
theirLordshipsdonotthinkthatthenewdefinition(v.)entitlestheappellants
tosucceedinthiscase.[atpp.124-125]

6.KingFeaturesSyndicateInc.v.Lechter,[1950]Ex.C.R.297,CameronJ.
(Ex.Ct.).[Actionfor,interalia,infringementofplaintiff’scopyrightin
drawingsandrepresentationsofstripscharacters“Popeye”,“Olive
Oyl”,“Wimpy”,and“Sweetpea”.]
Thebroadprincipleisthatingeneralatitleisnotbyitselfapropersubject
matterofcopyright;buttheremaybeparticularcaseswhenthetitleison
soextensiveascaleorofsoimportantacharacterastobeaproper
subjectofprotectionagainstbeingcopied.Thegeneralprinciple,however,
hasbeenmodifiedinCanadatoalimitedextentbyanamendmenttothe
CopyrightAct.Bysection2oftheCopyrightAmendmentAct,1931,
subsection(v)isaddedtosection2oftheAct.Bythatamendment“‘work’
shallincludethetitlethereofwhensuchatitleisoriginalanddistinctive.”The
effectoftheamendmentwasconsideredinthePrivyCouncilinFrancis,
Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.Ltd.[[1940]A.C.112.]….
Inthecaseatbartheevidenceestablishesthatthetitle“Popeye”was
originalinthatitwasthewordcoinedbytheplaintiffsortheirpredecessors
intitleandhadnotbeencopiedfromanyotherwork;andthatitwasalso
distinctive.Thedefendant’sadmissionthattheuseofthefourcharacters
constitutesinfringementoftheplaintiff’scopyrightthereinissufficient,Ithink,
toestablishthatwhatthedefendantcopiedwas“asubstantialpartofthe
work”inwhichtheplaintiffshadcopyright.Thatissufficient,inmyview,to
bringthetitle“Popeye”,whenusedinconjunctionwiththefourcharacters,
withintheprotectionaffordedbysection2(v).Ifind,therefore,thatnotonly
wasthereinfringementbythedefendantbytheproductionofthefour



charactersasshowninExhibit1(asnowadmittedbythedefendant),but
alsothattheuseoftheword“Popeye”inconnectionwithsuchcharacters,
constitutedaninfringementoftheplaintiff’srights.[atpp.301-302]

7.CanadianAdmiralCorp.v.Rediffusion,Inc.[1954]Ex.C.R.382,
CameronJ.(Ex.Ct.).
IhavegivencarefulconsiderationtothetermsoftheCopyrightActand
moreparticularlytotheprovisionsofs.2and3,andtheconclusionseems
inescapable—atleasttome—thatforcopyrighttosubsistina“work”itmust
beexpressedtosomeextentatleastinsomematerialform,capableof
identificationandhavingamoreorlesspermanentendurance.[at394]

8.Flamandv.SociétéRadio-Canada(1967),53C.P.R.217,ReidJ.(Que.
Sup.Ct.-translation).
Ihavetakenintoconsiderationallthejurisprudenceandauthoritiescited
bycounselfortheparties,andinparticular,bothworksofFox,Canadian
LawofTradeMarksandUnfairCompetition,2nded.,vol.2(1956),and
CanadianLawofCopyright&IndustrialDesigns,2nded.(1967).
Thisauthor’sremarksaswellasthoseoftheJudgesmadeinthecasescited
tomewouldseemtoestablishthefollowingprinciples:
1.Ameretitlecannotformtheobjectofacopyrightindependentlyof
theworktowhichitrelates.
2.Thereisnoexceptiontothisprincipleexceptwhenthetitleofaworkis
“originalanddistinctive”withinthemeaningofs.2(u)[i.e.,definition
of“work”]oftheCopyrightAct,andotherwisethetitleisinthepublic
domainandisnotsubjecttoownership.

3.Whentheownerofaworkcomplainsthataportionoftheworkhas
beenstolen,andthatthisportioncomprisesonlythetitle,hemust
provethatitisoriginal,otherwisehecannotsucceed.
4.Whenapersondesirestoobtainaninjunctiontopreventsomeone
elsefromusingacertaintitle,hemustprovetheoriginalanddistinct
characterofthistitle,i.e.,hemustdemonstratetheprobabilityof
confusioninthemindofthepublicbetweenhisworkandthatofthe
otherperson.
5.Whenanytitlecannotformthesubject-matterofacopyright
becauseoflackoforiginality,thepartyseekinganinjunctionto
preventitsusebysomeoneelsemustproveanintentiononthepart
ofthisotherpersontodeceivethepublicintoacceptinghisworkin
placeoftheonebelongingtothepartyseekingtheinjunction.
6.Whenatitledoesnotappeartobeanoriginalcreationofthemind,
andcannotenjoycopyright,thedifferencebetweenthetwoworks
bearingthattitleissufficienttoeliminateallunfaircompetition



becausetheworksarenotaddressedtothesamereadersanddo
notsatisfythesameintellectualneeds.

7.Whenatitleispurelydescriptiveand,consequently,devoidof
originality,aninjunctioncannotbeobtainedunlesstheapplicant
provesthathisadversaryisattemptingtopassoffanotherworkasthe
applicant’s.
8.If,inthecaseofapetitionforaninterlocutoryinjunctionseekingto
preventtheuseofatitleindependentlyoftheworktowhichitrelates,
theCourtentertainstheslightestdoubtconcerningtheexistenceof
petitioner’srighttotheexclusiveuseofthistitle,itmustdismissthe
petition.”[atpp.223-225]

Iamoftheopinionthatprimafacie,thetitleofFlamand’swork“Médecine
d’aujourd’hui”isnotonewhichmeetstherequirementsofs.2(u)ofthe
CopyrightAct,andconsequently,doesnotappeartobeeitheroriginalor
distinctive,sothatitcannotbeincludedintheworkbyFlamandwhich
enjoysprotection.[atp.226]

9.Cuisenairev.SouthWestImportsLtd.(1967),[1968]1Ex.C.R.493,Noël
J.(Ex.Ct.).
Imust,therefore,concludethatsection2(v)[i.e.,definitionof“work”]ofthe
Acthasnotalteredthelawinanysubstantialway,ifatall,andthatitisstill
necessarytofindthattheworkinwhichcopyrightisclaimedisan“original
literary,dramatic,musicalorartisticwork”inthenormalmeaningofthose
wordsandinthelightofthedefinitionsinsection2oftheAct.
IndeedtheonlyreasonablesolutionIcanarriveatisthattheActonly
protectsthoseoriginalliterary,dramatic,musicalandartisticworksreferred
toinsection4(1)[nowsection5(1)]oftheActanditthereforefollowsthatit
isstillnecessarybeforesection2(v)comesintooperationtofindthatthe
workfallsinoneortheotherofthesefourcategories.[atp.511]

10.Composers’,Authors’&Publishers’Assn.(Canada)v.CTVTelevision
NetworkLtd.,[1968]S.C.R.676,PigeonJ.
Inthe[Rome]Convention“oeuvres”(works)isnotdefined,therefore,as
appliedtomusicalworks,itisproperlytakenintheprimarysenseofthe
compositionitself,notitsgraphicrepresentationasinthe[Canadian
Copyright]Act.[atp.681]

11.FlybyNiteMusicCo.Ltd.v.RecordWherehouseLtd.,[1975]F.C.386
MahoneyJ.(F.C.T.D.).
Iacceptthedefendant’spositionthataphonographrecord,whichis
nothingmorethanacontrivancebymeansofwhichsoundsmaybe
mechanicallyreproduced,doesnotfitcomfortablywithinthemeaningof
theword“work”asthatwordisusedinordinaryparlance.Nevertheless,its



meaningmustbedeterminedinthecontextofthestatute.Ifindthatthe
word“work”asusedintheCopyrightActincludeseachandeverythingin
whichtheActsayscopyrightshallsubsist,bethatthingaproductofthearts
oraproductofmanufactureandtechnology.Ifitwereotherwise,theresult
wouldbethattheActwoulddeclarethatcopyrightsubsistsinaparticular
thingbutisnotopentoinfringementinanycircumstancesbecauseofthe
useoftheword“work”throughoutsections17[nowsection27]and19
[nowsection29,repealed].
Theopeningportionofsection3(1)clearlyimpliesthat,forthepurposesof
theAct,alectureisawork.Likewise,itmaybenotedthat,insection18
[nowsection28],Parliamentfounditnecessarytomakeexpressprovisionto
precludetheinfringementofcopyrightinapublicpoliticalspeech:an
unlikelybeneficiaryoftheappellation“work”inordinaryparlance.[atpp.
393-394]

12.ProfessionalPublishingLtd.v.TorontoParentMagazine(1986),9C.P.R.
(3d)207,StrayerJ.(F.C.T.D.).
IamsatisfiedthatthetrademarkTODAY’SPARENTisclearlydescriptiveof
thecharacterofthemagazineonwhichitappears.Suchatitle,whenused
inassociationwithamagazine,wouldsurelyconveytomostreadersthe
informationthatthisisamagazinedealingwithmattersofinteresttothose
whoarecurrentlyandfairlyregularlyengagedintheresponsibilitiesof
parenthood.Thiswouldinturnimplythatitisamagazineintendedfor
parentsofchildrenbelowtheageofmajority.[atp.216]

13.BritishColumbiav.Mihaljevic(1989),26C.P.R.(3d)184,MacdonellJ.
(B.C.S.C.).
Apersoncannothavecopyrightinasingleword,nameortitle,because
“apartfromthelawastotrade-marks,noonecanclaimmonopolyrightsin
theuseofawordorname”:Burberrysv.J.C.Cording&Co.Ltd.(1909),26
R.P.C.639atp.701(Ch.Div.).OnthispointseealsoExxonCorporationv.
ExxonIns.ConsultantsInt’lLtd.,[1981]3AllE.R.241atp.247(C.A.),and
TavenerRutledgeLtd.v.TrexapalmLtd.,[1977]R.P.C.275atpp.278-9(Ch.
Div.).Inordertogainexclusiveuseofawordorname,onemustturntothe
lawoftrademarks.[atp.190]
OnthebasisoftheKingFeaturescase[i.e.,KingFeaturesSyndicateInc.v.
Lechter,[1950]Ex.C.R.297(Ex.Ct.)],thedefendant’scopyrightscannot
preventtheplaintifffromadopting,usingandregisteringthewords“Expo”
and“Expo86”asofficialmarksand/ortrademark.Hiscopyrights,sofaras
theyincorporatesuchmarks,mustthendefertotheplaintiff’srightsunder
theTradeMarksAct….
Thedefendant’scopyrightdoesnotconferonhimtherighttoexclusiveuse
ofthedesigns,nordoesitgivehimauniquerighttouseeachconstituent
elementofsuchdesigns.Althoughhiscopyrightsmayhaveprovideda
validgroundforobjectiontotheplaintiff’sproposedadoptionanduseof
themarksEXPOandEXPO86,suchcopyrightscannotprevailoncethe

’

marksareregisteredandtherightstotheexclusiveusearesecuredtothe
plaintiff[undersections9and11oftheTradeMarksAct].Acopyrightis,
essentially,aprotectionagainstplagiarism.Tosetitupasadefencetoa
trademarkinfringementactionistomisconceivethenatureof,andthe
protectionofferedby,acopyright.[atpp.191-192]

14.CCHCanadianLtd.v.ButterworthsCanadaLtd.(1991),[1992]1F.C.3,
CullenJ.(F.C.T.D.)
Inmyview,thestrengthoftheplaintiff’sargumentontheseriousissue
branchofthetestturnsontheexistenceofapropertyright,ifany,thatCCH
canassertinthetitles.IfCCHcandemonstratethatthetitleshaveacquired
asecondarymeaning,i.e.,thatthetitlesareindicativeinthemindsofthe
publicofaconnectionbetweentheACCESSworksanditselfasthe
publisher,theninmyopiniontheremaybeaseriousissuetobetried….
Therefore,CCHmaybeabletosucceedattrialinrestrainingthe
publicationofDacfo’sbookbyButterworthsundertheACCESStitles,ifit
candemonstratethatthebookisalreadyrecognizedbytherelevant
sectorofthepublicasdenotingCCH’spublication.Inmyview,thisquestion
meetsthethresholdinjunctiontestofaseriousissuetobetried.[atpp.13-
14]
Inmyopinion,thedefendantsarecorrectinstatingthatthecopyright
protectionextendstothetitle.However,itwasclearlyheldinBritish
Columbiav.Mihaljevic(1989),26C.P.R.(3d)184(B.C.S.C.)atpage190that
aregistrationofcopyrightinaworkcannotbeusedasabasistorestrain
anotherfromusingthetitleasatrademark.Therefore,thedefendant’s
copyrightisnotabartoapassingoffactionbytheplaintiff.[atp.20]

15.CanadianOlympicAssn.v.KonicaCanadaInc.,(1991),[1992]1F.C.
797,HugessenJ.(F.C.A.).
Inthefirstplace,therespondenthaspleadeditsrightaslicenseetothe
copyrightinthetitleGuinnessBookofOlympicRecords.Thematterwasnot
pressedwithanyvigouratthehearingandproperlyso.Thereisno
indicationinthematerialastowhotheauthorofthetitleGuinnessBookof
OlympicRecordsmayhavebeenorwhenitwasfirstpublished.Giventhe
allegedantiquityofthepublications,itisbynomeansimpossiblethatany
copyrightinthetitlewouldbynowhaveexpired.Evenifsuchcopyright
werestillinbeing,however,itsextentislimitedbythedefinitionoftheword
“work”intheCopyrightAct,[R.S.C.1985,c.C-42,s.2]:
….“work”includesthetitlethereofwhensuchtitleisoriginaland
distinctive;[Emphasisadded.]

Apartfromtheword“Guinness”thereisnothingthatisoriginalordistinctive
inthetitleGuinnessBookofOlympicRecords.Itisinfactagooddealless
originalanddistinctivethanthetitle“TheManWhoBroketheBankat
MonteCarlo”,withrespecttowhichthePrivyCouncilhelduseasthetitleof
afilmdidnotinfringecopyrightinasongofthesamename.[SeeFrancis,

&

Day&HunterLtd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.,[1939]4D.L.R.353,[1940]
A.C.112(P.C.).]
Finallyonthisaspectofthematter,thewholequestionofcopyrightis,inmy
respectfulopinion,aredherring.Whetherornottherespondenthas
acquiredthecopyrighttothetitleGuinnessBookofOlympicRecords,what
isatissueinthepresentcaseisnotcopyrightatallbutrathertherighttouse
theword“Olympic”asatrademarkinassociationwithfilmsandcameras.
NothingintheCopyrightActtouchesthatrightinanyway[Bywayof
example,anartistwhopaintedapictureofsomeone’strademarkwould
havecopyrightinhisworkbutthatwouldnotallowhimtousetheworkasa
trade-mark.Conversely,theownerofthetrade-markcouldnotreproduce
theworkwithouttheauthorityoftheownerofthecopyright.Thetworights
arequitedistinct.][atpp.810-811]

16.ViaRailCanadaInc.v.LocationVia-RouteInc.(1992),45C.P.R.(3d)
96(Que.C.A.).
Itiswronginmyviewtoarguethatregistrationhastheeffectofgranting
copyrighttotheappellantoverthemarkVIA.Itisthelogowhichis
protected.[translation.][atp.105]

17.Non-exclusivelicenceissuedtoNationalFilmBoardofCanadaRoyal
authorizingthereproductionofpublishedworks,(2000),[2000]CBD24
(CopyrightBoard1992-11-30):
TheBoardfindsthatthecircumstancesofthiscasewarrantthatthelicence
feebesetat$800.00fortheuseofthemusicalwork“MaybeTonight”and
at$300.00fortheuseofthecinematographicwork“HelloToronto”.Inthe
caseofthe10-secondsequenceof13titlesofnewspapersarticlesand21
coversofnovels,theBoardconsidersthatitisnotadvisabletosetalicence
fee.Sincetheapplicantwishestousethetitlesoftheseliteraryworksrather
thanextractsthereof,theBoardconsidersthatwhatistobeusedisalready
permittedbytheAct–titlesareeithernotconsideredasworks(Fox,
CanadianLawofCopyright,p.128)–ortheiruseisofnegligiblevalue.[at
p.3]

18.CTVTelevisionNetworkLtd.v.Canada(CopyrightAppealBoard),
[1993]2F.C.115,LétourneauJ.(F.C.A.).
IntheCAPAC[i.e.,Composers,AuthorsandPublishers’Associationof
CanadaLimitedv.CTVTelevisionNetworkLimited(1968),[1968]S.C.R.676
(S.C.C.)]case,Pigeon,writingfortheSupremeCourtandapplyingaliteral
constructionoftheCopyrightAct,cametothefollowingconclusions:

1.Inviewofthedefinitionof“musicalwork”and“performance”,CTV,
bytransmittingitsentertainmentprogrammingtoitsaffiliatestations
eitherbyshippingacopyofthevideotapeorbymeansofcableand
microwavefacilities,didnotcommunicate“musicalwork”asdefined
intheAct,thatittosaygraphicreproductionsofmelodyand

%

harmony.Ratheritcommunicatednotthe“work”bya“performance
ofthework”.(…)
3.UnliketheCanadianCopyrightAct,TheRomeConventiondoesnot
define“work”andtheundefinedword,asappliedtomusicalwork,is
properlytakenintheConventionintheprimarysenseofthe
compositionitself,notitsgraphicrepresentationasintheAct.[atpp.
128-129F.C.]

19.Belangerv.AT&TCanadaInc.(1994),[1994]B.C.J.2792,StandfieldJ.
(B.C.CountyCt.):
[36]Idonotignore,nordiminish,thecommercialsignificanceofeffective
advertisingslogans.Theexamplesinrecentyearscomereadilytomind.
Consider,forexample,thewords,”Justdoit”,whichhadsuchenormous
marketingimpactfortheNikesportsempire.Inthecontextofthatuseno
doubtthewordsweresusceptibleoftrade-markregistration,butinmyview
theywouldnothaveconstitutedan”originalliterarywork”forcopyright
purposes.
[37]Consideringthewordsatissueinthecaseatbar,Iamremindedofthe
Kodakjingleofsomeyearsago:”Anytime,anywhere,inanykindof
weather,itsKodakfilmtime:takeapicture”.Nodoubtthejingleasa
wholewasanoriginalliterarywork,butthewords”anytime,anywhere”I
wouldhavethoughtwerenot.
[38]Inmyviewthewords“Anyone,anytime,anywhere”arenotmaterially
differentthanthe“permanentdiscount”wordsdescribedabove[in
WestfairFoodsLtd.v.JimPattisonIndustriesLtd.[1989]BCJ631(BCSC)]by
Mr.JusticeGibbsas“word(s)incommonuseineverydayspeech…
combiningthe(three)wordstogetherwillnotdefeattheunfetteredpublic
righttotheuseofthem…theyfallintotheclassificationofa“laudatory
epithet”towhichnoonecanhaveanexclusiverightormonopoly”[at
paras36-38]

20.88766CanadaIncvReader’sDigestAssociation,Inc(2001),[2001]
TMOB64(Trade-marksOffice)D.Savard:
Havingconsideredtheevidence,Iamsatisfiedthatitshowsuseofthe
trade-markinassociationwiththeregistredwares.Thewaresare“columns
ofliteraryexcerptspublishedinperiodicalmagazines”andthoseare
exactlythewaresinassociationwithwhichthetrade-markisbeingused.
Thetrade-markasregistredappearsatthetopofthepageasthetitleof
thecolumnpublishedintheReader’sDigestmagazine.

21.UnitedGrainGrowersLtd.v.LangMichener(2001),12CPR(4th)89
(FCA)RothsteinJ.
[7]AstheTrialJudgedidnotissueseparatereasonsforhisdecision,itis
necessarytoconsiderthereasonsoftheRegistrar.TheRegistrarfoundthat
themainissuewaswhethertheevidenceshoweduseofthewords”Country

(

Living”asatrade-markformagazines.Inansweringthisquestioninthe
negative,theRegistrarfoundthattheuseofthewordsCountryLivingdid
notdistinguishtheappellantsmagazinefromthoseofothers.Thetitleofthe
magazineCountryGuideappearedonthecoverandoneachpageofthe
magazine,includingpageswherethe”CountryLiving”sectionwas
featured.”CountryLiving”wasnotlistedinthetableofcontentsinamanner
thatwasanydifferentfromanyoftheothermajorsections.Although
consumersmightflipthroughthemagazinebeforepurchasingitandmight
buythemagazinespecificallyforthe”CountryLiving”section,itwastheuse
ofthewordsCountryGuidewhichdistinguishedtheappellantsmagazine
fromthoseofothersinthemindsofconsumers,nottheuseofthewords
“CountryLiving”.
[14]Inourrespectfulopinion,inembarkinguponaninquiryastowhether
thewords”CountryLiving”wereusedtodistinguishtheappellants
magazine,theRegistrarmisinterpretedherfunctionundersection45and
erredinlaw.Nowordsinsection45directtheRegistrartore-examine
whethertheregisteredtrade-markisusedforthepurposeofdistinguishing,
orsoastodistinguish,wares.Rather,theRegistrarsdutyundersection45is
onlytodetermine,withrespecttothewaresspecifiedintheregistration,
whetherthetrade-mark,asitappearsintheregister,hasbeenusedinthe
threeyearspriortotherequest.
[15]Inthiscase,itisundisputedthattheregisteredtrade-mark”Country
Living”wasmarkedonthemagazineCountryGuideatthetimeoftransfer
ofpropertyinorpossessionofthemagazineinthenormalcourseoftrade.
Wethinkonceitwasdeterminedthattheregisteredtrade-mark,asit
appearsintheregister,wasusedinassociationwiththewaresspecifiedin
itsregistration,theinquiryundersection45wasatanend.

22.CitéAmériqueDistributionInc.vC.E.P.A.LeBaluchonInc(2002),[2002]
CarswellQue1568(QueSupCt)BishopJ.
64Probablementlesmots”MargueriteVolant”,utilisésseuls,nesontpas
originaux,parcequilsproviennentdesrechercheshistoriquesdunetierce
personne.Cependant,lorsquecetitreestutiliséparrapportàloeuvre
originalequildécrit,letitredevientunepartieintégrantedecetteoeuvreet
participeàsonoriginalité.Lecaractèredistinctifdutitreestévident;cestle
nomdelhéroïnedeloeuvre,quipermetdedistinguerloeuvre,dela
particulariser.
§6.2UnitedKingdom
1.Kellyv.Hutton(1868),3Ch.703,PageWoodJ.(C.A.).

Nowitappearstousthatthereisnothinganalogoustocopyrightinthe
nameofanewspaper,butthattheproprietorhasarighttopreventany
otherpersonfromadoptingthesamenameforanyothersimilarpublication
(…)[atp.708]

1.Weldonv.Dicks(1878),27W.R.639,MalinsJ.(Ch.D.).

)

[overruledonthispointbyDicksv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76(C.A.)].
Buttosaythatthereisnopropertyinanameaspartofabookorother
publicationisabsurd.Thetitleofabookisamaterialpartofthebook,and
entitledtothesameprotectionasthebookitself.[atp.641]

2.Dicksv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76,JessellJ.andLushJ.(C.A.).
Wecomethentothequestionofcopyright.NowIdonotsaythatthere
couldnotbecopyrightinatitle,as,forinstance,inawholepageoftitleor
somethingofthatkindrequiringinvention.However,itisnotnecessaryto
decidethat.But,assumingthattherecanbecopyrightinatitle,whatdoes
copyrightmean?Itmeanstherighttomultiplycopiesofanoriginalwork.If
youcomplainthatapartofyourworkhasbeenpirated,youmustshow
thatthatpartisoriginal,andifitisnotoriginal,youhavenocopyright.How
canthetitle“SplendidMisery”besaidtobeoriginal,whentheverysame
wordsfortheverysamepurposewereusednearlyeightyyearsago?…
Thereforeinthiscase,evenassumingyoucouldestablisharighttothetitle
asoriginal,ifitwasreinventedyouhavenoevidenceofreinvention,but
youhaveevidenceofthepriorpublication.Itseemstome,therefore,on
thatgroundalsothattheactionmustbedismissed.”[JessellJ.atp.89]
[Thiscase]turnsonthesimplequestionwhethertherecanbecopyrightin
thetitle“SplendidMisery,”andIamclearlyofopinionthattherecannot.I
takeittobeestablishedlawthattobethesubjectofcopyrightthematter
mustbeoriginal,itmustbeacompositionoftheauthor,somethingwhich
hasgrownupinhismind,theproductofsomethingwhichifitwereapplied
topatentrightswouldbecalledinvention.Nothingshortofthatwould
entitleamantocopyright.Now,canitbesaidthereisanythingoriginalin
thesetwowords?Isupposethereishardlyapersonwhohasgrownto
maturityinthiscountrywhohasnotreadthemhundredsoftimesandheard
themspokenhundredsoftimes.Tomymind“SplendidMisery”isa
hackneyedphrase.Moreover,itisinevidencethatabouteightyyearsago
anovelwaspublishedwiththatverytitle,andthat,thoughitisoutofprint,
secondhandcopiesarestilltobemetwith.If,therefore,weweretogono
furtherbackthanthat,thetitlehasbeenknowntothepublicforatleast
eightyyears,andIcannothelpthinkingthatthephraseoriginatedmany
yearsbeforethat.Itwasonelikelytobecoinedinaveryearlyage,andis
onewhich,asIsaidbefore,mostpeoplehavereadandheardhundredsof
times.Thatofitselfisenoughtodeterminethecase.Thereisnothingoriginal
inthetitle.Thereisnothinginitthatindicatesanyintellectualeffort.Thereis
nothingmorethanthetakingupaphrasewhichhadlongbeeninpublic
use.Ithasbecomeapublicproperty,anditisimpossiblethatapersoncan
appropriateitandclaimcopyrightinit.[LushJ.atpp.92-93]

3.Osbournev.J.M.Dent&SonsLtd.(1925),94L.J.Ch.308,RomerJ.(Ch.
D.)
Whethereachinstalmentisa“work”withinthemeaningoftheprovisoto
section3oftheCopyrightAct,1911,itisnoteasytosay.TheActcontains
nodefinitionofa“work”.Section15,sub-section2,however,referstoa
“workpublishedinaseriesofnumbersorparts,”anditwouldlookas

”

though,forthepurposesoftheAct,anovel,thoughpublishedinparts,is,
whencompleted,toberegardedasa“work.”Butinthecaseofessays,
shortstories,orpoems,separatelypublished,eachwouldbeawork,andto
remainaworkevenafterpublishedinvolumeformwithothers.Thevolume
itselfcannotverywellbeawork.Itisintruthacollectionofworks.Ifthe
plaintiff’scontentionbeaccepted,thepracticalresultwillthereforebe
that,sofarassuchworksareconcerned,theprovisotosection3mightjust
aswellhavebeenomittedfromtheAct.
Itappearstome,however,thattheprovisoiscapableofaconstruction
thatavoidssucharesult,and,ifso,itismydutytoadoptthatconstruction
inpreferencetothatadvancedbytheplaintiff.Byvirtueofsection1ofthe
InterpretationAct,1889,theword“work”inthesingularwhereusedinthe
provisoincludestheword“works”intheplural,nointentiontothecontrary
appearingintheproviso.Soread,therecanbenodifficultyinthe
defendantsstatingthatthepriceorpricesatwhichtheyintendpublishing
suchofStenvenson’sworksastheydesiretopublish.[atp.311]

4.Ladbroke(Football)Ltd.v.WilliamHill(Football)Ltd.,[1964]1AllE.R.
465,HodsonJ.(H.L.).

Itwassubmittedbytheappellantsthattheseheadings[showingthechoice
ofbets]weretheequivalentoftitlesofabookorplayandthattitlescould
notbeprotected.Theyreliedontwocases,Dicksv.Yates[(1881),18Ch.D.
76]andFrancisDay&Hunter,Ltd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorpn.,[[1939]4
AllE.R.192;[1940]A.C.112]neitherofwhichsupportthepropositionthat,as
amatteroflaw,copyrightcannotsubsistintitles.Nodoubttheywillnotasa
rulebeprotected,sincealonetheywouldberegardedasasufficiently
substantialpartofthebookorothercopyrightdocumenttojustifythe
preventingofcopyingbyothers.Inanyevent,thereisgoodauthorityfor
theprotectionofheadingsinapropercaseinLambv.Evans[[1893]1Ch.
218]wheretheheadingsinquestionwereelaboratedandgivenineach
caseinEnglish,French,GermanandSpanish.[atp.476]

5.ExxonCorp.v.ExxonInsuranceConsultantsInternationalLtd.,(1981),
[1982]R.P.C.69,GrahamJ.,(Ch.D.).
AsIhavealreadystated,thequestionthatIhavetodecideis,shortly
stated,whetherExxonisan“originalliterarywork”withinthemeaningof
section2?Idonotthinkitis.Whatisitthen,onemayask?Itisawordwhich,
thoughinventedandthereforeoriginal,hasnomeaningandsuggests
nothinginitself.Togiveitsubstanceandmeaning,itmustbeaccompanied
byotherwordsorusedinaparticularcontextorjuxtaposition.Whenused
aspartofanyoftheplaintiffs’corporatenames,itclearlyhasa
denominativecharacteristicasdenotingthecompanyinquestion.When
used,asIassumeitis,withtheplaintiffs’goods,itwouldclearlyhavethe
effectofdenotingoriginorquality.Itisinfactaninventedwordwithno
meaning,whichisatypicalsubjectfortrademarkregistration,andwhich
nodoubt,withadequateuse,iscapablealsoofbecoming,ithasnot
alreadybecome,distinctiveoftheplaintiffsandtheirgoodsatcommon
law.Itisnotinitselfatitleordistinguishingnameand,asIhavesaid,only

’$

takesonmeaningandsignificancewhenactuallyusedwithotherwords,
forexampleindicatingthatitisthenameofacompany,orinaparticular
juxtapositionas,forexample,ongoods.
NothingIhavesaidaboveisintendedtosuggestthatIconsiderthataword
whichisusedasatitlecan,asamatteroflaw,neverinanycircumstances
bethesubjectofcopyright,andIwoulddisagreewithdictainprevious
casestothecontraryeffect.Suchawordwould,however,Ithink,haveto
havequalitiesorcharacteristicsinitself,ifsuchathingispossible,which
wouldjustifyitsrecognitionasanoriginalliteraryworkratherthanmerelyas
aninventedword.Itmaywellturnoutnottobepossibleinpractice,but,as
atpresentadvised,Iconsiderthatthemerefactthatasinglewordis
inventedandthatresearchorlabourwasinvolvedinitsinventiondoesnot
initself,inmyjudgment,necessarilyenableittoqualifyasanoriginalliterary
workwithinsection2oftheAct.[atpp.78-79]
ButcouldLewisCarroll,ifhehadmerelyinventedtheword“Jabberwock”
andhadneverwrittenthepoemofwhichitisapart,havesuccessfully
contendedthathehadcopyrightinthewordalone?Intheabsenceofits
registrationasatrademark,couldhe,byvirtueofcopyright,preventa
commercialcompanyadoptingitaspartofsuchcompany’scorporate
name?Ithinknot,thelegalreasonbeingthatthewordaloneandbyitself
cannotbeconsideredasa“literarywork”,thesubjectofcopyrightunder
theAct.Itbecomespartofa“literarywork”withintheActwhenitis
embodiedinthepoem,butitisthepoemasacompositionwhichisawork
withintheActandnottheworditself.[atpp.79-80]

6.ExxonCorp.v.ExxonInsuranceConsultantsInternationalLtd.,(1981),
[1982]R.P.C.81,OliverL.J.,(C.A.).
Butthatforwhichprotectionissoughtintheinstantcase[i.e.,theword
“EXXON”]doesnotappeartometohaveanyofthequalitieswhich
common-sensewoulddemand.Itconveysnoinformation;itprovidesno
instruction;itgivesnopleasurethatIcanconceive;itissimplyanartificial
combinationoffourlettersofthealphabetwhichservesapurposeonly
whenitisusedinjuxtapositionwithotherEnglishwords,toidentifyoneor
otherofthecompaniesintheplaintiffgroup.[atp.90]

7.MothercareU.K.Ltd.v.PenguinBooksLtd.,[1988]R.P.C.113,DillonJ.
(C.A.).
Itisclearthatthetitleofabookisnotordinarilyusedasatrademark,
becauseitordinarilygivesnoindicationaboutthebook’stradeorigin.The
titlemayalsobedescriptive.(…)Themoredescriptiveatitleisofthe
contentsofabook,theharderitistofindthatitisusedinatrademark
sense.

8.MarcusPublishingplcv.Hutton-WildCommunicationsLtd.,(1989),
[1990]R.P.C.576,headnotes2and3(C.A.).

’

(2)Whileordinarydescriptivewordscouldcomebyusetoacquireaspecial
meaning,thelawisreluctanttoallowsuchwordstobefencedoffsoasto
becometheprivatepreserveofoneparticulartradesman.
(3)Toestablishthetortofpassingoff,itwasessentialfortheplaintiff’s
proprietaryrightandgoodwillinthenameinquestiontobemadeout;
mereconfusionwasnotenoughtowarrantthegrantofaninjunction.In
particular,therewasnobasisforclaiminggoodwillinthenameofa
newspaperormagazineifthatnewspaperormagazinewasnotyetonthe
market.[atp.577]

9.Noahv.Shuba(1990),[1991]F.S.R.14,MummeryJ.(Ch.D.).
Itisnotnecessaryformetodecidethealternativeargument.Ihave,
however,heardargumentfrombothsidesandIcansaythatIwouldhave
rejectedDr.Noah’ssubmissionthatthetwolastsentences[i.e.,“Follow
clinicprocedureforaftercare.Ifproperproceduresarefollowed,noriskof
viralinfectionscanoccur.”]ontheirownconstituteda“work”withinthe
meaningofsection43[i.e.,falseattributionofauthorship].Thosetwo
sentencesontheirowndonotaffordsufficientinformation,instructionor
literaryenjoymenttoqualifyasawork:seeExxonCorporationv.Exxon
InsuranceConsultantsInternationalLimited[1982]Ch.119.[atp.33]

10.GamesWorkshopLtd.v.TransworldPublishersLtd.(1993),[1994]20
F.S.R.705,BalcombeJ.(C.A.).
Thejudgewentontosaythatthemark“DarkFuture”wasnotnotably
descriptiveofthecontentsofeitherseriesofbooks.Wewouldbeprepared
toacceptthatthemarkmayherebepartiallydescriptiveofthebooks’
contents.However,themark,asappliedtotheplaintiffs’andTransworld’s
novelsisnotclearlyasdescriptiveoftheircontentsasthetitle
“Mothercase/othercare,”thesubjectofcomplaintintheMothercasecase
[MothercareU.K.Ltd.v.PenguinBooksLtd.(1988),[1988]R.P.C.113(C.A.)],
wasofthecontentsofthatnon-fictionbook.Further,asthejudgesaid:
Inanycase,“DarkFuture”isnotjustthetitleofanyofthebooks;itis
thenameofaseriesineachcase.Transworld,likeGW,sellsitsbookas
partofits“DarkFuture”series.Thatismadeclearbythefigures1to4
besidesthewords“DarkFuture”onthefrontcoversandthe
referenceselsewhereinthebookstoothervolumesinthesameseries,
alsoinTransworldadvertising,anditspointsofsaledisplaywherethe
titlesaredisplayedtogetherunderalarge“DarkFuture”.

Weagreewiththejudgethattheuseof“DarkFuture”asthetitleofaseries
ofbooksissignificantlydifferentfromitsuseasthetitleofasinglebook.It
mightbeconsideredcomparabletothetitleofaperiodicalmagazine,
whichhasbeenheldtobeusedasatrademark-seeJohnLengLtd.v.
GoldStarPublications[1967]F.S.R.75.[atpp.711-712]

§6.3UnitedStates

’

1.ReCooper,117U.S.P.Q.396,RichJ.(C.C.P.A.1958).
Nothingwesayshouldbetakenasimplyingthatnotrademarkforbooks
canberegistered;butbeforetherecanberegistrationtheremustbea
trademarkandatrademarkexistsonlywheretherehasbeentrademark
use.[atp.398]
Thepurchaserofabookisnotaskingfora“kind”or“make”ofbook.Heis
pointingoutwhichoneoutofmillionsofdistincttitleshewants,designating
thebookbyitsname.Itisjustasthoughonewalkedinagrocerystoreand
said“Iwantsomefood”andinresponsetothequestion“Whatkindof
food?”said,“Acanofchickennoodlesoup.”[atp.399]
Buthoweverarbitrary,novelornon-descriptiveofcontentsthenameofa
book-itstitle-maybe,itneverthelessdescribesthebook.Appellanthas
nowhereattemptedtoanswerthequestion.Howelsedoyoudescribeit-
whatelsewouldyoucallit?Ifthenameortitleofabookwerenotavailable
asadescriptionofit,anefforttodenotethebookwouldsoundlikethe
playingofthegame“TwentyQuestions.”[atp.400]

2.Brownv.LyleStuart,Inc.,141U.S.P.Q.936,NunezJ.(N.Y.S.C.1964).
Ifplaintiff’stitlehasacquiredasecondarymeaningandthedefendant’s
useofanallegedlysimilartitleconstitutesanunfairbusinesspractice,and
unfaircompetition,acourtofequityhasthepowertogranttherelief
sought.[atp.937]
Wheretitlesofbooksareinvolved,asdistinguishedfromthoseofplays,
motionpicturesandthelike,thecourtwillbemorereluctanttofindunfair
competitionbecausebookbuyersgenerallyplacemoreimportanceupon
theauthorthanuponthetitleofaliterarywork.[atp.938]

3.ParamountPicturesCorp.v.DorneyParkCoaster,9U.S.P.Q.(2d)1161,
TroutmanJ.(D.C.E.DPenn.1988).
Consequently,wefindthatthetitle“TOPGUN”is,atleastdescriptiveand
thatParamounthasdevelopedsecondarymeaningforthename“top
gun”.Althoughdefendantproducedevidenceofotherusesoftheterm
priortothemovie,specificallywithrespecttothenavaltrainingfacility
describedinthemovie,thecircumscribedandsporadicinstancesof
“advertising”oftheMiramarfacilitythroughairshows,catalogueofferings
offacsimileequipmentandinsignia,suchevidenceisnotsufficienttoshow
morethanminimalimpactuponthepublicconsciousness.[atp.1164]

4.Rogersv.Grimaldi,10U.S.P.Q.(2d)1825,NewmanJ.(2ndCir.1989).
Thepurchaserofabook,likethepurchaserofacanofpeas,hasarightnot
tobemisledastothesourceoftheproduct.Thus,itiswellestablishedthat
wherethetitleofamovieorabookhasacquiredsecondarymeaning-that
is,wherethetitleissufficientlywellknownthatconsumersassociateitwitha

’

particularauthor’swork-theholderoftherightstothattitlemayprevent
theuseofthesameorconfusinglysimilartitlesbyotherauthors.[atp.1827]

5.Takeallv.PepsicoInc.,29U.S.P.Q.(2d)1913(4thCir.1993).
Weareoftheviewthatthedisputedphrase[“Yougottherightone,uh-uh”]
failstoevincetherequisitedegreeoforiginalitytoentitleittocopyright
protectionandisashortexpressionofthesortthatcourtshaveuniformlyheld
uncopyrightable.[atp.1918]

6.Dr.SeussEnterprises,L.P.v.PenguinBooksUSA,Inc(1997),42USPQ2d
1184,(CA9thCir)OScannlainJ.
Underthisfactor,theinquiryiswhetherTheCatNOTintheHat!merely
supersedestheDr.Seusscreations,orwhetherandtowhatextentthenew
workis”transformative,”i.e.,alteringTheCatintheHatwithnew
expression,meaningormessage.Parodyisregardedasaformofsocial
andliterarycriticism,havingasociallysignificantvalueasfreespeech
undertheFirstAmendment.Thiscourthasadoptedthe”conjureup”test
wheretheparodistispermittedafairuseofacopyrightedworkifittakes
nomorethanisnecessaryto”recall”or”conjureup”theobjectofhis
parody.SeeMCA,Inc.v.Wilson,677F.2d180,184(2dCir.1981);Warner
Bros.,Inc.v.AmericanBroadcastingCos.,523F.Supp.611,617(S.D.N.Y.),
aff©d,654F.2d204(2dCir.1981);WaltDisneyProds.v.AirPirates,581F.2d
751,757(9thCir.1978),cert.denied,439U.S.1132,99S.Ct.1054,59L.Ed.2d
94(1979).Accordingly,thecriticalissueunderthisfactoriswhetherThe
CatNOTintheHat!isaparody.[…]SeeAcuff-Rose,510U.S.at582,114
S.Ct.at1173(“Thethresholdquestionwhenfairuseisraisedindefenseof
parodyiswhetheraparodiccharactermayreasonablybeperceived.”).

7.Luddenv.MetroWeekly(1998),47U.S.P.Q.(2d)1087,GreenJ.(D.C.
Columbia).
Relyingsolelyonthepresentrecord,theCourtholdsthatundertheLanham
Actanewspaperormagazinecolumniscapableofbeingagoodor
servicedistinctfromthepublicationinwhichitappearsand,therefore,that
thetitleofanewspapercolumnormagazineisamenabletoprotectionas
atrademarkinitsownrightsolongasitmeetstheotherrequirements,such
asdistinctivenessanduse.[atp.1093]

8.MattelInc.vMCARecordsinc(2002),63USPQ2d1715(CA9
th)
KozinzinskiJ.
B.ThereisnodoubtthatMCAusesMattel’smark:Barbieisonehalfof
BarbieGirl.ButBarbieGirlisthetitleofasongaboutBarbieandKen,a
referencethat—atleasttoday—canonlybetoMattel’sfamouscouple.
Weexpectatitletodescribetheunderlyingwork,nottoidentifythe
producer,andBarbieGirldoesjustthat.TheBarbieGirltitlepresagesasong
aboutBarbie,oratleastagirllikeBarbie.Thetitleconveysamessageto
consumersaboutwhattheycanexpecttodiscoverinthesongitself;it’sa

”

quickglimpseofAqua’stakeontheirownsong.Thelyricsconfirmthis:The
femalesinger,whocallsherselfBarbie,is“aBarbiegirl,in[her]Barbie
world.”Shetellshermalecounterpart(namedKen),“Lifeinplastic,it’s
fantastic.Youcanbrushmyhair,undressmeeverywhere/Imagination,life
isyourcreation.”Andofftheygoto“party.”ThesongpokesfunatBarbie
andthevaluesthatAquacontendssherepresents.[…]
[2]ThesongdoesnotrelyontheBarbiemarktopokefunatanother
subjectbuttargetsBarbieherself.[…]
[3]TheSecondCircuithasheldthat“ingeneralthe[Lanham]Actshouldbe
construedtoapplytoartisticworksonlywherethepublicinterestin
avoidingconsumerconfusionoutweighs
thepublicinterestinfreeexpression.”Rogersv.Grimaldi,875F.2d994,999
(2dCir.1989)[…]
[4]Atitleisdesignedtocatchtheeyeandtopromotethevalueofthe
underlyingwork.Consumersexpectatitletocommunicateamessage
aboutthebookormovie,buttheydonotexpectittoidentifythepublisher
orproducer.SeeApplicationofCooper,254F.2d611,615-16(C.C.P.A.
1958)(A“title…identifiesaspecificliterarywork,…andisnotassociated
inthepublicmindwiththe…manufacturer.”(internalquotationmarks
omitted)).Ifweseeapaintingtitled“Campbell’sChickenNoodleSoup,”
we’reunlikelytobelievethatCampbell’shasbranchedintotheart
business.Nor,uponhearingJanisJoplincroon“OhLord,won’tyoubuyme
aMercedes-Benz?,”wouldwesuspectthatsheandthecarmakerhad
enteredintoajointventure.Atitletellsussomethingabouttheunderlying
workbutseldomspeakstoitsorigin:
Thoughconsumersfrequentlylooktothetitleofaworktodetermine
whatitisabout,theydonotregardtitlesofartisticworksinthesame
wayasthenamesofordinarycommercialproducts.Sinceconsumers
expectanordinaryproducttobewhatthenamesaysitis,weapply
theLanhamActwithsomerigortoprohibitnamesthatmisdescribe
suchgoods.Butmostconsumersarewellawarethattheycannot
judgeabooksolelybyitstitleanymorethanbyitscover.Rogers,875
F.2dat1000(citationsomitted).
[5]RogersconcludedthatliterarytitlesdonotviolatetheLanhamAct
“unlessthetitlehasnoartisticrelevancetotheunderlyingworkwhatsoever,
or,ifithassomeartisticrelevance,unlessthetitleexplicitlymisleadsasto
thesourceorthecontentofthework.”Id.at999(footnoteomitted).
[6]ApplyingRogerstoourcase,weconcludethatMCA’suseofBarbieis
notaninfringementofMattel’strademark.UnderthefirstprongofRogers,
theuseofBarbieinthesongtitleclearlyisrelevanttotheunderlyingwork,
namely,thesongitself.Asnoted,thesongisaboutBarbieandthevalues
Aquaclaimssherepresents.Thesongtitledoesnotexplicitlymisleadasto
thesourceofthework;itdoesnot,explicitlyorotherwise,suggestthatitwas
producedbyMattel.TheonlyindicationthatMattelmightbeassociated
withthesongistheuseofBarbieinthetitle;ifthiswereenoughtosatisfythis
prongoftheRogerstest,itwouldrenderRogersanullity.

’&

§6.4Varia
1.Forsterv.Parasuraman,[1964]A.I.R.331,AnantanarayananJ.(Madras
C.A.).
Ithasbeenclearlylaiddownthatthereisnocopyrightina‘title’assuch,
sincethisisnotsubstantiallyenoughtomerittheclaimtoprotection.Itmay
becapableofprotectiononlyina“passingoff”action:seeDicksv.Yates,
(1881)18Ch.D.78andotherauthoritieslistedinHalsbury(SimondsEdn.)
Vol.8,p.377,underparagraph69I.[atp.333]

2.Colmaxv.ArchangeInternational(2001),191RIDA280(CAVersailles,
12
eChambre;2001-01-11)
Maisconsidérantquindépendammentdelanotiondantériorité,laquelle
estinopérantedanslecadredelapplicationdudroitdelapropriété
littéraireetartistique,letitreduneœuvrepeutbénéficierduneprotection
légale,dèslorsquilsatisfaitaucritèredeloriginalitéentantquiltraduit
lempreintedelapersonnalitédesonauteur;[atp.281.]
[…]
Ilsensuitquelareproductiondecetitre[Angélique]parlasociété
appelanteconstitueuneatteinteauxdroitsquedétientMmeGoloubinoff
etlasociétéArchangeInternationalsurlamarquedéposée[Angélique
MarquisedesAnges],laquelleavocationàprotégerunproduitouun
service,àsavoirunesérielittérairecélèbre.
§7.0ListofCases
§7.1Canada
§7.1.1General
1.CanadaPublishingCo.v.Gage(1884),6O.R.68(Ont.H.C.);aff’d
(1884),11O.A.R.402(Ont.C.A.);aff’d(1885),11S.C.R.306.
2.Harrisv.CanadianMusicSalesCorp.,[1941]O.W.N.99(Ont.C.A.).
3.KingFeaturesSyndicateInc.v.Lechter(1950),12C.P.R.60(Ex.Ct.).
4.CanadianAdmiralCorp.v.Rediffusion,Inc.(1954),20C.P.R.75(Ex.
Ct.).
5.Composers’,Authors’&Publishers’Assn.(Canada)v.CTVTelevision
NetworkLtd.(1966),48C.P.R.246(Ex.Ct.);quashedonothergrounds
[1968]S.C.R.676.

’%

6.Cuisenairev.SouthWestImportsLtd.(1967),54C.P.R.1(Ex.Ct.);aff’d
(1968),57C.P.R.76(S.C.R.).

7.BlueCrestMusicInc.v.CompoCompanyLtd.(1974),17C.P.R.(2d)
149(F.C.T.D.);(1976),30C.P.R.(2d)14(F.C.A.);(1979),45C.P.R.(2d)1
(S.C.C.).
8.FlybyNiteMusicCo.Ltd.v.RecordWherehouseLtd.(1975),20C.P.R.
(2d)263(F.C.T.D.).
9.RockyMountainDanceCo.v.Brookes(1987),19C.P.R.(3d)131
(F.C.T.D.).

10.BritishColumbiav.Mihaljevic(1986),2B.C.L.R.(2d)190(B.C.S.C.—
InterlocutoryInjunction);(1989),26C.P.R.(3d)184(B.C.S.C.);aff’d
(1991),36C.P.R.(3d)445(B.C.C.A.);leavetoappealtotheSupreme
CourtofCanadarefused39C.P.R.(3d)v.
11.Prestonv.20thCenturyFoxCanadaLtd.(1990),33C.P.R.(3d)249
(F.C.T.D.);aff’d(1993),53C.P.R.(3d)407(F.C.A.).
12.CTVTelevisionNetworkLtd.v.Canada(CopyrightAppealBoard)
(1990),30C.P.R.(3d)262&iv(F.C.T.D.);aff’d(1993),46C.P.R.(3d)343
(F.C.A.);applicationforleavetoappealtotheSupremeCourtof
Canadarefused(1993),51C.P.R.(3d)v.
13.CCHCanadianLtd.v.ButterworthsCanadaLtd.(1991),36C.P.R.(3d)
417(F.C.T.D.).
14.Non-exclusivelicenceissuedtoNationalFilmBoardofCanadaRoyal
authorizingthereproductionofpublishedworks,unreporteddecision
rendered1992.11.30bytheCopyrightBoard,fileno.U0-1992-10.
15.ViaRailCanadaInc.v.LocationVia-RouteInc.(1992),45C.P.R.(3d)
96(Que.C.A.).

16.Belangerv.AT&TCanadaInc.(1994),[1994]B.C.J.2792(B.C.County
Ct.).
17.WestfairFoodsLtd.v.JimPattisonIndustriesLtd.(1989),[1989]B.C.J.
631(BCSC-InterlocutoryInjunction).

'(

18.Shewanv.Canada(AttorneyGeneral)(1999),O.J.2790(Ont.Gen.
Div.).
§7.1.2Titlesofperiodicals
1.Careyv.Goss(1886),11O.R.619(Ch.D.).

2.NewYorkHeraldvOttawaCitizenCo(1908),12Ex.C.R.1(Ex.Ct.);affd
(1909),41S.C.R.229(S.C.C.).
3.Bowmanv.Epstein,[1937]2D.L.R.555(Ont.H.C.);aff’d[1937]2D.L.R.
804(Ont.C.A.).
4.BottintéléphoniquedevotrequartierInc.v.NouveaubottinlocalInc.
(unreported),Que.Sup.Ct.,Doc.No.500-05-695-387-65,MayrandJ.,
October26,1965;discontinuanceofactionfiled.
5.CollectifLibertéInc.v.Liberté-magazineLteé(1980),J.E.80-277(Que.
Sup.Ct.—Interlocutory);declarationofsettlementoutofcourtfiled
1980.11.12.
6.JournallaNouvelleInc.v.LaNouvelleduHautSt-FrançoisInc.(1980),
J.E.966-78(Que.Sup.Ct.).
7.T.V.GuideInc.v.PublicationsLaSemaineInc.(1984),9C.P.R.(3d)368,
6C.I.P.R.110(Que.Sup.Ct.).
8.TélémédiaCommunicationsInc.v.Trustarlimitée,unreported
judgmentrendered1994.03.08bySévignyJ.,Doc.500-05-011025-837
(Que.Sup.Ct.—Interlocutory).
9.88766CanadaIncvReader’sDigestAssociation,Inc(2001),[2001]
T.M.O.B.64(Trade-marksOffice).
10.UnitedGrainGrowersLtd.v.LangMichener(1998),[1998]T.M.O.B.222
(TMOB,subnomineUnitedGrainGrowersLtd.(Re));affdbyan
unreporteddecisionoftheTrialDivisionoftheFederalCourtof
Canada;revd(2001),12C.P.R.(4th)89(FCA);leavetoappealtothe
SupremeCourtofCanadaallowed(2001),276N.R.198(note)(SCC);
discontinuanceappealfiledon2002-05-15(S.C.C.).
§7.1.3Titlesofbooks

’)

1.CanadaPublishingCo.v.Gage(1884),6O.R.68(Ont.H.C.);aff’d
(1884),11O.A.R.402(Ont.C.A.);aff’d(1885),11S.C.R.306.

2.Rosev.McLeanPublishingCo.(1897),27O.R.325(Ont.Div.Ct.);rev’d
(1897),24O.A.R.240(Ont.C.A.).
3.McIndoov.MussonBookCo.(1915),35O.L.R.42(Ont.H.C.);aff’d
(1916),35O.L.R.342(Ont.C.A.).
4.InternationalPressLtd.v.Tunnell,(1937),[1938]1D.L.R.393(Ont.C.A.).
5.Zlatav.LeverBrothersLtd.(1948),9C.P.R.34(Que.Sup.Ct.).

6.CanadianOlympicAssn.v.KonicaCanadaInc.(1987),18C.P.R.(3d)
470(F.C.T.D.—Interlocutory);(1990),30C.P.R.(3d)60(F.C.T.D.);rev’d
(1991),39C.P.R.(3d)400(F.C.A.);leavetoappealrefused(1992),41
C.P.R.(3d)v(S.C.C.).
7.CCHCanadianLtd.v.ButterworthsCanadaLtd.(1991),36C.P.R.(3d)
417(F.C.T.D.).
8.GroupePolygone-ÉditeursInc.v.SernaCommunicationsInc.(1994),
59C.P.R.(3d)449(Que.Sup.Ct.—InterimInjunction);(1994),J.E.95-118
(Que.Sup.Ct.—Merits)HeslerJ.
9.Jacobv.Boisseau(1996),J.E.96-1228(Que.Sup.Ct.);appeal500-09-
002620-961.
§7.1.4Titlesofplays
1.Francis,Day&Hunter,Ltd.v.TwentiethCenturyFoxCorp.,[1937]4
D.L.R.700(Ont.H.C.);rev’d[1938]3D.L.R.375(Ont.C.A.);(1939),8
F.L.J.163(J.C.P.C.—Motionforleave);aff’d[1939]4All.E.R.192,[1939]
4D.L.R.353(J.C.P.C.—Canada).
2.Flamandv.SociétéRadio-Canada(1967),53C.P.R.217(Que.Sup.
Ct.).
3.Rochatv.SociétéRadio-Canada,[1974]C.S.638(Que.Sup.Ct.).
4.CitéAmériqueDistributionInc.vC.E.P.A.LeBaluchonInc(2002),[2002]
CarswellQue1568(Que.Sup.Ct.)

'”

§7.1.5Varia

1.NationalPublishingCo.v.Lloyd(1938),8FortnightlyLawJournal37
(Ont.CountyCt.).
2.FawcettPublicationsInc.v.Valentine(1950),13C.P.R.1(Ex.Ct.).

3.Assn.ofProfessionalEngineersv.Canada(RegistrarofTradeMarks)
(1959),31C.P.R.79(Ex.Ct.).
4.CanadianJewishReviewLtd.v.Canada(RegistrarofTradeMarks)
(1961),37C.P.R.89(Ex.Ct.).
5.Laidlawv.MetropolitanToronto(Municipality)(1974),7L.C.R.111
(LandComp.Bd.);rev’d(1976),9L.C.R.269(Ont.Div.Ct.);rev’d
(1976),9L.C.R.269(Ont.C.A.);rev’d[1978]2S.C.R.736.
6.ProfessionalPublishingLtd.v.TorontoParentMagazine(1986),9C.P.R.
(3d)207(F.C.T.D.);rev’donconsentbyjudgmentoftheFederalCourt
ofAppealrendered(January5,1987)(F.C.A.).

7.StyleCommunicationsInc.v.SouthamInc.(1990),39F.T.R.154
(F.C.T.D.—InterlocutoryInjunction).
§7.2UnitedKingdom
§7.2.1General
1.Maxwellv.Hogg(1867),2Ch.App.307(C.A.).

2.Kellyv.Hutton(1867),37L.J.Ch.297(Ch.D.);var’d(1868),3Ch.App.
703,37L.J.Ch.917(C.A.);(1869),20L.T.201(C.A.).

3.Mackv.Petter(1872),L.R.14Eq.431(Ch.D.).

4.Weldonv.Dicks(1878),10Ch.D.247(Ch.D.).

5.Dicksv.Yates(1881),18Ch.D.76(Ch.D.);rev’d(1881),18Ch.D.76
(C.A.).

6.Schovev.Schminké(1886),33Ch.D.546(Ch.D.).

&$

7.LicensedVictuallers’NewspaperCo.v.Bingham(1888),38Ch.D.139
(C.A.).

8.Hollinrakev.Truswell,[1893]2Ch.377(Ch.D.);rev’d[1894]3Ch.420
(C.A.).

9.Osbournev.J.M.Dent&SonsLtd.,[1925]Ch.369(Ch.D.).

10.Sinanidev.LaMaisonKosmeo(1928),139L.T.365(C.A.).

11.Kirkv.J.&R.FlemingLtd.(1929),[1928-1935]MacG.Cop.Cas.44(Ch.
D.).

12.Ladbroke(Football)Ltd.v.WilliamHill(Football)Ltd.,[1962]C.L.Y.509,
107Sol.Jo.34(C.A.);aff’d[1964]1AllE.R.465(H.L.).

13.ExxonCorp.v.ExxonInsuranceConsultantsInternationalLtd.,[1981]2
AllE.R.495(Ch.D.);aff’d[1981]3AllE.R.241(C.A.);leavetoappealto
theHouseofLordsrefused[1982]R.P.C.69.

14.Rosev.InformationServicesLtd.(1986),[1987]F.S.R.254(Ch.D.).

15.Noahv.Shuba,(1990)[1991]F.S.R.14(Ch.D.).

16.BravadoMerchandisingServicesLtd.v.MainstreamPublishing
(Edinburgh)Ltd.(1995),[1996]23F.S.R.205(Ct.ofSession—Scotland).

17.ShetlandTimesLtd.(The)v.Wills(1996),[1997]F.S.R.604(ScotlandCtof
Sessions—OuterHouse);settledoutofcourt1997.11.11.

18.EmapNationalPublicationsLimitedv.SecurityPublicationsLimited
(1997),[1997]F.S.R.891(Ch.Div.).

§7.2.2General
1.Hoggv.Kerby(1803),32E.R.336(Ch.).
2.Prowettv.Mortimer(1856),4W.R.519(Ch.).

3.Clementv.Maddick(1859),65E.R.841(Ch.).
4.Ingramv.Stiff(1859),5Jur.947(C.A.).

5.Bradburyv.Beeton(1869),39L.J.Ch.57(Ch.D.).

&

6.Walterv.Emmott(1885),54L.J.Ch.1059(C.A.).
7.PrimrosePressAgencyCo.v.Knowles(1886),2T.L.R.404(Ch.D.).

8.Borthwickv.EveningPost(1888),37Ch.D.449(C.A.).
9.Dillonv.Pearson(1901),[1901-04]MacG.Cop.Cas.17(Ch.D.).
10.Coxv.SportsPublishingCo.(1902),[1901-04]MacG.Cop.Cas.27(Ch.
D.).
11.DaleReynolds&Co.v.TradePapersPublishingCo.(1902),[1901-04]
MacG.Cop.Cas.32(Ch.D.).

12.C.ArthurPearsonLtd.v.O’Connor(1906),[1905-10]MacG.Cop.Cas.
43(Ch.D.).
13.Ewen’sColonialStampMarketLtd.v.FederalStampCo.(1907),[1905-
10]MacG.Cop.Cas.78(K.B.D.).
14.GeorgeOutram&Co.v.LondonEveningNewspapersCo.(1911),28
R.P.C.308(Ch.D.).

15.Aldenv.Arnsby-Wilson,[1911-16]MacG.Cop.Cas.13(Ch.D.).
16.WilliamStevensLtd.v.CassellCo.(1913),30R.P.C.199(Ch.D.).
17.RacingPigeonPublishingCo.v.Watson(1919),[1917-23]MacG.Cop.
Cas.117(Ch.D.).
18.RidgwayCo.v.Hutchinson(1923),40R.P.C.335(Ch.D.).

19.BrittainPublishingCo.(London)Ltd.v.Trade&CommercialPressLtd.,
[1957]R.P.C.271(Ch.D.).
20.PearlCooperLtd.v.RichmondHillPressLtd.,[1957]R.P.C.363(Ch.D.).

21.Rubber&TechnicalPressLtd.v.MacLawn&SonsLtd.,[1961]R.P.C.
264(Ch.D.).
22.NormanKarkPublicationsLtd.v.OdhamsPressLtd.(1960),[1962]1All
E.R.636(Ch.D.).

&

23.D.C.Thomson&Co.v.KentMessengerLtd.(1974),[1975]R.P.C.191
(Ch.D.).
24.MorningStarCo-operativeSocietyLtd.v.ExpressNewspapersLtd.
(1978),[1979]5F.S.R.113(Ch.D.).
25.NewsweekInc.v.BritishBroadcastingCorp.(1978),[1979]R.P.C.441
(Ch.D.);aff’d(1978),[1979]R.P.C.441-447(C.A.).

26.WorldAthletics&SportingPublicationsLtd.v.ACMWebb(Publishing)
Co.(1980),[1981]F.S.R.27(C.A.).
27.TamworthHeraldCo.v.ThomsonFreeNewspapersLtd.(1989),[1991]
F.S.R.337(Ch.D.).
28.MarcusPublishingplcv.Hutton-WildCommunicationsLtd.(1989),
[1990]R.P.C.576(C.A.).

29.ManagementPublicationsLtd.v.BlenheimExhibitionsGroupplc,
[1991]F.S.R.348(Ch.D.).
30.Morgan-Grampianplcv.TrainingPersonnelLtd.(1991),[1992]F.S.R.
267(Ch.D.).
31.AdvanceMagazinePublishingInc.v.RedwoodPublishingLtd.(1992),
[1993]20F.S.R.449(Ch.D.).
§7.2.3Titlesofbooks
1.Spottiswoodev.Clarke(1841),41E.R.900(Ch.).

2.Cobbettv.Woodward(1872),41L.J.Ch.656(Ch.D.).
3.Metzlerv.Wood(1877),47L.J.Ch.625(C.A.).
4.Kellyv.Byles(1879),48L.J.Ch.569(Ch.D.);aff’d(1880),49L.J.Ch.181
(C.A.).
5.Crotchv.Arnold(1909),54Sol.Jo.49,[1905-10]MacG.Cop.Cas.227
(Ch.D.).

6.JohnF.Shaw&Co.v.WilliamCollins,Sons&Co.(1911),[1911-16]
MacG.Cop.Cas.14(Ch.D.).

&

7.Broemelv.Meyer(1912),29T.L.R.148(Ch.D.).
8.CambridgeUniversityPressv.UniversityTutorialPress(1928),45R.P.C.
335(Ch.D.).
9.Mathiesonv.SirIsaacPitman&SonsLtd.(1930),47R.P.C.163,[1828-
35]MacG.Cop.Cas.163(Ch.D.).

10.Cheyneyv.RialtoProductionsLtd.(1941),[1936-45]MacG.Cop.Cas.
386(K.B.D.).
11.W.H.Allen&Co.v.BrownWatsonLtd.,[1965]R.P.C.191(Ch.D.).

12.OxfordUniversityv.PergamonPressLtd.(1977),121Sol.Jo.758(C.A.).
13.MothercareU.K.Ltd.v.PenguinBooksLtd.,[1988]R.P.C.113(C.A.).

14.GamesWorkshopLtd.v.TransworldPublishersLimited.(1993),[1994]20
F.S.R.705(C.A.).
§7.2.4Titlesofplays
1.Chappellv.Sheard(1855),69E.R.717(Ch.).
2.Chappellv.Davidson(1855),69E.R.719(Ch.);aff’d(1856),44E.R.289
(C.A.).
3.Elkin&Co.v.Francis,Day&Hunter(1910),[1905-10]MacG.Cop.Cas.
294(Ch.D.).

4.Raleighv.KinematographTradingCo.(1914),31R.P.C.143(Ch.D.).
5.British&DominionFilmCorp.v.FredD’AlbertRepertoryCo.(1928),
[1923-28]MacG.Cop.Cas.346(Ch.D.).

6.Houghtonv.FilmBookingOfficesLtd.(1931),48R.P.C.329(Ch.D.).
7.O’Gormanv.ParamountFilmServiceLtd.,[1937]2AllE.R.113(Ch.D.).
8.Lylev.LondonSocietyofMagicians(1943),[1936-45]MacG.Cop.Cas.
409(Ch.D.).

&’

9.LouisDreyfussW.R.ProductionsLtd.v.Henry’sProductionsLtd.(1949),
[1950]63D.A.56(Ch.Div.).
10.TwentiethCenturyFoxFilmCorp.v.GalaFilmDistributorsLtd.,[1957]
R.P.C.105(Ch.D.).
11.Rosev.InformationServicesLtd.,(1986),[1987]F.S.R.254(Ch.D.).
12.GrundyTelevisionPty.Ltd.v.StartrainLtd.,[1988]F.S.R.581(Ch.D.).
13.CountySoundv.OceanSoundLtd.,(1989),[1991]F.S.R.367(C.A.).
§7.3UnitedStates
1.WaltDisneyProductions(Inc.)v.SouvaineSelectivePictures,Inc.
(1931),90U.S.P.Q.138(D.C.S.D.N.Y.)(1931),91U.S.P.Q.313(2ndCir.).
2.Collinsv.Metro-GoldwynPicturesCorp.,39U.S.P.Q.520(D.C.S.D.N.Y.
1939);(1939),42U.S.P.Q.553(2ndCir.).
3.Beckerv.Loew’sInc.(1943),56U.S.P.Q.455(7thCir.);(1943),319U.S.
772(S.C.—cert.den.).
4.Jacksonv.UniversalInternationalPictures(1950),87U.S.P.Q.131(S.C.
Cal.).
5.MeredithPublishingCompany(Exparte)(1956),109U.S.P.Q.427
(Comm.Pat.).
6.MeredithPublishingCompany(Exparte)(1956),109U.S.P.Q.428
(Comm.Pat.).
7.Curtisv.TwentiethCenturyFoxFilmCorp.(1956),109U.S.P.Q.250
(Cal.).
8.ReCooper(1956),110U.S.P.Q.323(Comm.Pat.);aff’d(1958),117
U.S.P.Q.396(C.C.P.A.1958);cert.den.119U.S.P.Q.501(S.C.—cert.
den.1958).
9.NationalCouncilBooks,Inc.(Inre)(1959),121U.S.P.Q.198(P.O.-
T.T.A.B.).
10.Brownv.LyleStuart,Inc.(1964),141U.S.P.Q.936(N.Y.S.C.).

&&

11.Tomlinv.WaltDisneyProductions(1971),171U.S.P.Q.415(C.A.Cal.).
12.Kirklandv.NationalBroadcastingCo.(1976),198U.S.P.Q.560;aff’d
(1977),565F.2d310(2ndCir.).
13.Pilon(Inre)(1977),177U.S.P.Q.178(P.T.O.-T.T.A.B.).
14.FrederickWarne&Co.,Inc.(Inre)(1983),218U.S.P.Q.345(P.T.O.-
T.T.A.B.).
15.Scholastic(Inre)(1984),223U.S.P.Q.431(P.T.O.-T.T.A.B.).
16.ParamountPicturesCorp.v.DorneyParkCoaster(1988),9U.S.P.Q.
(2d)1161(D.C.E.D.Penn.).
17.Rogersv.Grimaldi(1988),8U.S.P.Q.2d1562(D.C.S.D.N.Y.);(1989),10
U.S.P.Q.(2d)1825(2ndCir.).
18.Narellv.Freeman(1989),10U.S.P.Q.(2d)1596(9thCir.).
19.HalLeonardPublishingCorp.(Inre)(1990),15U.S.P.Q.(2d)1574
(P.T.O.-T.T.A.B.).
20.Scholastic(Inre)(1992),23U.S.P.Q.(2d)1774(P.T.O.-T.T.A.B.).
21.Takeallv.PepsicoInc.(1992),809F.Supp.18(D.C.Md.);aff’d(1993),
29U.S.P.Q.(2d)1913(4thCir.).
22.Dr.SeussEnterprises,L.P.v.PenguinBooksUSA,Inc(1997),42U.S.P.Q.
(2d)1184,(CA9thCir)
23.Posthuma(Inre)(1998),45U.S.P.Q.(2d)2011(P.T.O.-T.T.A.B.).
24.Luddenv.MetroWeekly(1998),47U.S.P.Q.(2d)1087(D.C.Columbia).
25.MattelInc.vMCARecordsinc(2002),63U.S.P.Q.(2d)1715(9
thCir.)
KozinzinskiJ.
§7.4AustraliaandNewZealand

1.Broadhurstv.Nicholls(1903),3N.S.W.S.R.147.

&%

2.TheCricketerLtd.v.NewspressPty.Ltd.(1973),[1974]V.R.477(Vict.
S.C.).
3.Greenv.BroadcastingCorp.ofNewZealand,[1984]I.P.R.191
(N.Z.S.C.);aff’d(1988),[1989]R.P.C.469(N.Z.C.A.);aff’d(1989),[1989]
R.P.C.700(J.C.P.C.—N.Z.).
§7.5Varia
1.Forsterv.Parasuram,[1964]A.I.R.331,[1964]2Madras258(Madras
Appeal).
2.TelevisionBroadcastsLtd.v.HomeGuidePublicationCo.,[1982]F.S.R.
505(HongKongH.C.).
3.Kalachnikoffv.StarsSpectaclesetCreation(1992),155R.I.D.A.218
(T.G.I.P.—référé,1992.09.30);(1993),156R.I.D.A.180(T.G.I.Paris—Merits;
1993.01.20);aff’dC.A.Paris4echambre;1995.10.25.
4.HitachiLimitedv.ZafarAutoandFilterHouse(1996),[1997]24F.S.R.50
(PakistanCopyrightBoard).

5.Colmaxv.ArchangeInternational(2001),191RIDA280(CAVersailles,
12
eChambre;2001-01-11)
§8.0Authors
§8.1.1Interpretation
1.CÔTÉ(Pierre-André),TheInterpretationofLegislationinCanada,2nd
ed.(Cowansville,Blais,1992),atpp.55-58.
2.CÔTÉ(Pierre-André),Interprétationdeslois,2nded.(Cowansville,Blais,
1990),pp.61-63.

3.DRIEDGER(ElmerA.),ConstructionofStatutes,2nded.(Toronto,
Butterworths,1983),atpp.18-22.
4.GROUPEDEJURILINGUISTIQUEFRANÇAISE,Guidecanadiende
rédactionlégislativefrançaise
éditionpermanente(Ottawa,Justice
Canada,1984),at“Definitions”.

&(

5.PIGEON(Louis-Philippe),Rédactionetinterprétationdeslois(Québec,
Éditeurofficiel,1965),atpp.20-22.
6.PIGEON(Louis-Philippe),DraftingandInterpretingLegislation(Toronto,
Carswell,1988),atpp.32-35.
§8.1.2Copyrightissues
1.BONCOMPAIN(Jacques),Ledroitd’auteurauCanada:étudecritique
(Montréal,CercledulivredeFrance,1971),atpp.29-31.
2.CHROMECEK(Milan)etal.,WorldIntellectualPropertyGuide—
Canada(NewYork,MatthewBender,1991),atno.2[4][a].
3.DRAPKIN(Darrel),TitlesofPublicationsatLaw(1947),25CanadianBar
Review139.
4.FOGO(JamesG.),NotesFromCanada(1992),82TrademarkReporter
112.
5.FOX(HaroldGeorge),TheCanadianLawofCopyrightandIndustrial
Design,2nded.(Toronto,Carswell,1967),atpp.128-131,502-524.
6.FOX(HaroldGeorge),TheCanadianLawofCopyright,1sted.
(Toronto,UniversityofTorontoPress,1944),atpp.114-117,510-527.
7.FOX(HaroldGeorge),TheCanadianLawofTradeMarksandUnfair
Competition,3rded.(Toronto,Carswell,1972),atpp.539-551.
8.GAMACHE(Barry),MustaTrade-markDistinguishForIttobeUsed?
(2002),16WorldIntellectualPropertyReport.
9.GOLDSMITH(Immanuel),TradeMarksandIndustrialDesigns(Toronto,
Carswell,1982),atnos.318-319.
10.GOUIN(Léon-Mercier),Ledroitd’auteur(Montréal,Fides,1950),atpp.
22-23.
11.HAYHURST(WilliamL.),AnnualSurveyofCanadianLaw-Industrial
Property(1979),11OttawaLawReview481,atp.483.

&)

12.HAYHURST(WilliamL.),CopyrightSubject-Matter,inCopyrightLawof
Canada(Toronto,Carswell,1994),ch.2,atpp.41-46;reprintedfrom
SubjectMatter,inCopyrightLaw(Ottawa,NationalJudicialInstitute,
1993),ch.3,atpp.21-31.
13.HAYHURST(WilliamL.),IndustrialProperty(1972),5OttawaLawReview
477,atpp.485-486.
14.HAYHURST(William),CopyrightSubject-Matter,inCopyrightand
ConfidentialInformationLawofCanada(Toronto,Carwell,1994),at
pp.41-46.
15.HITCHMAN(CarolV.),PinkPanther:ATitleoraTrademark?(1997),3
IntellectualProperty165.
16.LEDUC-CAMPBELL(Diane),ConfusionBetweenCompetingAlmanacs
ResultsinPermanentInjunction(1995),9WorldIntellectualProperty
Report37.
17.LEDUC-CAMPBELL(Diane),CourtRejectsEfforttoStopPublicationof
SoapOperaMagazine(1994),8WorldIntellectualPropertyReport189.
18.LEDUCCAMPBELL(Diane),YukonDidNotInfringeCopyrightInUseof
©MagicandMystery©Slogan(1999),13WorldIntellectualProperty
Report391.
19.LEVEBRE(Éric),Del’idéeetdesonexpression:unconceptdépassé
(1995),7Lescahiersdepropriétéintellectuelle387.
20.MARTIN(Stefan),Lesjeuxdesociétéetleurprotectionjuridique
(Québec,PublicationsduQuébec,1994),atch.3
21.MAYBEE(GarethE.),WhatEveryYoungLawyerShouldKnowAbout
IntangibleIndustrialProperty(1946),24CanadianBarReview87,at
pp.96-97.
22.MAYRAND(Albert),Respectautitredel’oeuvrelittéraire(1957),27
RevueduBarreau49.
23.MCKEOWN(JohnS.),FoxCanadianLawofCopyrightandIndustrial
Designs,3
rded.(Toronto,Carswell,2000),atpp.153-156.
24.MIKUS,(Jean-Philippe),Chevauchementsdedroitsenpropriété
intellectuelle–Deuxièmepartie:lacavalcadedudroitd’auteuretdu

&”

droitdesmarquesdecommerce(2002),15Lescahiersdepropriété
intellectuelle167,atp.175etsq.
25.MORSE(Charles),CopyrightinLiteraryPhrase(1928),6CanadianBar
Review558.
26.MORSE(Charles),Copyright
PublicAdvertisement
LiteraryPhraseIn
Infringement(1928),6CanadianBarReview305.
27.ROGERS(Samuel),Copyright(1954),19C.P.R.73.
28.SHAPIRO(NormanR.),NoLiteraryCopyrightinTradeMarks(1964),38
PatentandTrademarkInstituteofCanadaProceedings116.
29.TAMARO(Normand),Loisurledroitd©auteur,5thed.(Toronto,
Carwell,2002),atpp.57-65.
30.TAMARO(Normand),LaLoisurledroitd’auteurcommentéeet
annotée1993(Toronto,Carswell,1992),atpp.35-44.
31.TAMARO(Normand),Ledroitd’auteur:fondementsetprincipes
(Montréal,P.U.M.1994),atpp.69-70.
32.TAMARO(Normand),TheAnnotatedCopyrightAct1992(Toronto,
Carswell,1992),atpp.94-102.
33.TheSubjectMatterofCopyright(1939),8FortnightlyLawJournal312.
34.TRUDEL(Pierre)etal.,Ledroitducyberespace(Montréal,Thémis,
1997),ch.16,§3.2.6.
35.VAVER(David),CopyrightLaw,(Toronto,IrwinLaw,2000),atpp.49-
52.
36.VAVER(David),TheNationalTreatmentRequirementsoftheBerne
andUniversalCopyrightConventions(1986),17InternationalReviewof
IndustrialPropertyandCopyrightLaw577.
37.VAVER(David),Canada,inNIMMER(MelvilleB.)etal.ed.,
InternationalCopyrightLawandPractice(NewYork,MatthewBender,
1992),atno.2[4][a].
38.VAVER(David),CopyrightinForeignWorks:Canada’sInternational
Obligations(1987),66CanadianBarReview76,atpp.90-95.

%$

§8.2UnitedKingdom
1.BIRREL(Augustine),SevenLecturesontheLawandHistoryof
CopyrightinBooks(London,Kelley,1899),atpp.188-191.
2.BLANCOWHITE(T.A.)etal.,Kerly’sLawofTradeMarksandTrade
Names,12thed.(London,Sweet&Maxwell,1986),atno.16.61.
3.BLANCOWHITE(T.A.)etal.,Patents,TradeMarks,Copyrightand
IndustrialDesigns,2nded.(London,Sweet&Maxwell,1978),atpp.
117,122-123and144.
4.CULLABINE(J.),CopyrightinShortPhrasesandSingleWords,[1992]
EuropeanIntellectualPropertyReview205
5.DRYSDALE(John)etal.,PassingOffLawandPractice(London,
Butterworths,1986),atnos.9.01-9.24.
6.FLINT(MichaelF.),AUser’sGuidetoCopyright,3rded.(London,
Butterworths,1990),nos.3.02,5.10,21.05and21.24.
7.GARNETT(Kevin)etal.,CopingerandSkoneJamesonCopyright,14th
ed.(London,Sweet&Maxwell,1999),atnos.21-21to21-32and21-35.
8.INNES(John)etal.,TheShetlandTimesInternetCase(1997),76
CopyrightWorld29.
9.KIRBY(James)ed.,ClaimsofExclusiveRightinTitlesofBooks(1879),2
LegalNews89.
10.LADDIE(Hugh)etal.,TheModernLawofCopyright(London,
Butterworths,1980),atpp.22etsq.
11.LADDIE(Hugh)etal.,TheModernLawofCopyrightandDesigns,2nd
ed.(London,Butterworths,1995),atch.8.
12.LESTER(David)etal.,Joynson-HicksonUKCopyrightLaw(London,
Sweet&Maxwell,1990),atnos.1.08,1.09,1.19,1.31.
13.MARTINO(T.),PopeyetheSailor©:ManofLetters-TheCopyright
ProtectionofLiteraryCharacters,[1988]EuropeanIntellectualProperty
Review76

%

14.SKONEJAMES(EdmundP.)etal.,CopingerandSkoneJameson
Copyright,12thed.(London,Sweet&Maxwell,1980),nos.740-760.
15.SKONEJAMES(EdmundP.)etal.,CopingerandSkoneJameson
Copyright,13thed.(London,Sweet&Maxwell,1991),atnos.21.28-
21.49.
16.STERLING(J.AdrianL.)etal.,CopyrightLawintheUnitedKingdom,1st
ed.(London,LegalBooks,1986),atnos.214,222and746-748.

17.STERLING(J.AdrianL.),PhilosophicalandLegalChallengesinthe
ContextofCopyrightandDigitalTechnology(2000),31International
ReviewofIndustrialPropertyandCopyrightLaw508,atpp.510etsq.
18.STONE(R.),CopyrightProtectionforTitles,CharacterNamesand
Catch-PhrasesintheFilmandTelevisionIndustry[1996]5
EntertainementLawReview178
19.WADLOW(Christopher),TheLawPassing-Off(London,Sweet&
Maxwell,1990),atnos.6.35-6.38.

§8.3UnitedStates
1.AMDUR(LeonH.),CopyrightLawandPractice(NewYork,Clark
Boardman,1936),atpp.226-280.
2.ANGEL(Dennis),LegalProtectionforTitlesintheEntertainmentIndustry
(1979),52SouthernCaliforniaLawReview279.
3.BIRD(RobertC.),SingleWorkTitlesandGroup,ArtistorAuthorsNames
—RegistrabilityRevisited(1998),88TrademarkReporter250.
4.BURCART(Janie),NoTitlestoTitles:AnAnalysisoftheLackofCopyright
ProtectionforLiteraryTitles(1986),32ASCAPCopyrightLaw
Symposium75.
5.CALLMANN(Rudolf),TheLawofUnfairCompetition,Trademarksand
Monopolies,4thed.(Wilmette,Callaghan,1983),nos.17.22-17.23.
6.CLEARY(J.Michael),FilmandTelevisionTitleClearanceProblems:At
IssueistheLikelihoodofConfusion,in1990Entertainment,Publishing

%

andtheArtsHandbook(NewYork,ClarkBoardman,1990),atpp.245-
250.
7.CONANT,DevelopmentsintheLaw:TitleProtection(1990),10Loyola
EntertainmentLawJournal467.
8.EVANS(Ray),WhoAreYou?:TrademarkProtectionForBandNames,in
VIERA(JohnDavid)etal.,ed,Entertainemnt,PublishingandtheArts
Handbook(St-Paul,ThomsonWest,2002),pp.193-224.
9.FISHMAN(LoisR.),TipsforArtists,WritersandEntertainmentIndustry
Applicants(1992),52TrademarkWorld37.
10.GILSON(Jerome),TrademarkProtectionandPractice(NewYork,
MatthewBender,1988),atno.2.10.
11.GRODSKY(AllenB.)etal.”ThisSong©sGotNoTitleJustWordsanda
Tune©:ProtectionofsongtitlesundertheLanhamAct(2001),19
EntertainmentandSportsLawyers;reprintedinVIERA(JohnDavid)et
al.,ed,Entertainemnt,PublishingandtheArtsHandbook(St-Paul,
ThomsonWest,2002),pp.381-388.
12.HANCOCK(KatherineI.),NotesfromthePatentOffice(1962)52
TrademarkReporter35,123,260,395,569,787.
13.HELGET(GeraldE.),Slogans-ProtectableMarketingTools?(1992),20
AIPLAQuarterlyJournal35,atp.46.
14.JOHN(PeterC.),LiteraryTitles—CopyrightableorTrademarkable
(1967),57TrademarkReporter151;(1966),11VillanovaLawReview
796.
15.KLEIN(HerbertDavid),IsUnauthorizedUseofTitlesofArtisticWorksin
UnrelatedFieldsActionablePiracy?(1961-62),28BrooklynLawReview
59.
16.LADAS(StephenP.),TheInternationalProtectionofLiteraryandArtistic
Property,inHarvardStudiesinInternationalLawNo.3(NewYork,
Macmillan,1938),Vol.1,atno.242.
17.MAYER(MichaelF.),NewDevelopmentsinTitleProtection(1980),10
PerformingArtsReview47.

%

18.McCARTHY(J.Thomas),McCarthyonTrademarksandUnfair
Competition,3rded.(NewYork,ClarkBoardmanCallaghan,1992),at
nos.10.01-10.14.
19.McCARTHY(J.Thomas),McCarthyonTrademarksandUnfair
Competition,4thed.(St.Paul,WestGroup,1996),chapter10.
20.McCARTHY(J.Thomas),TrademarksandUnfairCompetition(San
Francisco,Bancroft-Whitney,1984),atpp.323-326.
21.NETTERVILLE(VictorS.)etal.,PiracyandPrivilegeinLiteraryTitles(1959),
32SouthernCaliforniaLawReview101.
22.NIMMER(MelvilleB.)etal.,NimmeronCopyright(NewYork,Matthew
Bender,1989),atnos.1.08[D],2.03[A]and2.16.
23.NOTE,EntertainmentTitleDuplicationCases:AProcessofEvolution
(1963),39IndianaLawJournal110.
24.NOTE,ProtectionofLiteraryandArtisticTitles:AComparativeAnalysis
ofUnitedStatesandForeignLaw(1970),55CornellLawReview101.
25.SHAPIRO(Peter),TheValidityofRegisteredTrademarksforTitlesand
CharactersAftertheExpirationofCopyrightontheUnderlyingWork
(1984),31ASCAPCopyrightLawSymposium69.
26.SINGER(Barbara),ARoseByAnyOtherName:TrademarkProtection
ofthenamesofPopularMusicGroups(1992),14Hastings
Commerce/EntertainmentLawJournal331
27.TANNENBAUM(SamuelW.),CopyrightLaw:TitlesintheEntertainment
Field(1959),45AmericanBarAssociationJournal459.
28.TANNENBAUM(SamuelW.),UseofTitlesforCopyrightedAndPublic
DomainWorks(1958-59),6BulletinoftheCopyrightSocietyofthe
U.S.A.64.
29.TRAPHAGEN(Mark)etal.,TheSongRemainstheSame–ButNot
NecessarilytheName(1990),39AmericanUniversityLawReview975.
30.WILLIAMS(Elizabeth),TrademarkProtectionUnderLanhamActof
NameofMusicalGroup(1993),115AmericanLawReviewFed171.

%’

§8.4France
1.BERTRAND(André),LeDroitd’AuteuretlesDroitsVoisins,2
nded.(Paris,
Masson,1999),§4.322.

2.BIGNON(Isabelle),Exercicedesdroitsdesauteurs—Protectiondes
titres,inJuris-Classeurs—Propriétélittéraireetartistique(Paris,Éditions
techniques,1990),fascicule352.
3.CARREAU(Caroline),Mériteetdroitd’auteur,(Paris,LGDJ,1981),at
nos.194,437-508,575.
4.CASTELAIN(Raoul),Laprotectiondestitres/Theprotectionoftitles
(1956),10Revueinternationaledudroitd’auteur2.
5.COLOMBET(Claude),Propriétélittéraireetartistique,9thed.,Précis
Dalloz(Paris,Dalloz,1999),at§66-72
.

6.COLOMBET(Claude),L’évolutiondelajurisprudencesurlaprotection
destitresd’œuvresdel’espritparlaloidu11mars1957,inMélanges
A.Chavanne((Paris,Litec,1990),atp.213etsq.

7.COLOMBET(Claude),Titresd’ouvragesetpublicationspériodiques,in
Juris-classeurConcurrence-consommation(Paris,Éditionstechniques,
1996),fascicule200.
8.COLOMBET(Claude),Lestatutjuridiquedestitresdejournaux(1977),
1058L’échodelapresseetdelapublicité58.
9.DESBOIS(Henri),Ledroitd’auteurenFrance,3rded.(Paris,Dalloz,
1978),atnos.190-203.

10.DESBOIS(Henri),Laprotectiondestitresdepublication[1973]Revue
internationaledepropriétéindustrielleetartistique293.
11.DURRANDE(Sylviane),Droitd’auteuretconcurrencedéloyale,inJuris-
classeurPropriétélittéraireetartistique(Paris,Éditionstechniques,
1993),fascicule1116,atno.49.
12.FRANÇON(André),Laprotectiondestitresdejournauxparledroitdes
marquesetparl’actionenconcurrencedéloyale,inMélanges
Bastian(Paris,Librairiestechniques,1974),Vol.2,atp.39etsq.

%&

13.GREFFE(Pierre)etal.,Lapublicité&laloiendroitfrançais,Union
européenneetSuisse,8thed.(Paris,Litec,1995),atpp.145-153.
14.PLAISANT(Robert),Propriétélittéraireetartistique,1sted.(Paris,
Delmas,1985),atnos.56-59.
15.PLAISANT(Robert),Laprotectiondestitres(1964),33Revue
internationaledudroitd’auteur37;(1964),33Revueinternationaledu
droitd’auteur89.
16.PLAISANT(Robert),Laprotectiondestitres,[1950]1Annalesde
propriétéindustrielle217.
17.RENOUARD(Auguste-Charles),Traitédesdroitsd©auteursdansla
litérature,lessciencesetlesbeaux-arts(Paris,JulesRenouardetCie,
1839),tomesecond,pp.115-128.
18.SARRAUTE(Raymond),Ladéfensedutitrebanal[1971]1Gazettedu
Palais183.
19.SAVATIER(René),Laloidu11mars1957surlapropriétélittéraireet
artistique(1957)Juris-classeurpériodique—Lasemainejuridique,
doctrine1398,atnos.16and50.
20.VALANCOGNE(François),Letitrederoman,dejournal,defilm—sa
protection(Paris,Sirey,1963).
§8.5Australia
1.LAHORE(James),IntellectualPropertyinAustralia:CopyrightLaw
(Sydney,Butterworths,1988),atnos.2.3.15-2.3.20and2.5.155.
2.RICKETSON(Stanley),TheLawofIntellectualProperty(Melbourne,Law
Book,1984),atnos.5.62-5.64.
3.STARKE(J.G.),Copyright-Subject-matter-Singleinventedwordnot
originalliterarywork(1982)56AustralianLawJournal191.
§8.6Varia
§8.6.1Law

%%

1.AHUJ(SudhirD.),India:IsaNewspaperNameaTrademark?(1995),75
TrademarkWorld23.
2.BERENBOOM(Alain),LeDroitd’Auteur(Bruxelles,Larcier,1984),atno.
33.
3.BUYDENS(Mireille),Laprotectiondelaquasi-création:information,
publicité,mode,photographiesdocumentairesetesthétique
industrielle—droitbelge,droitallemand,droitfrançais(Bruxelles,
Larcier,193),atpp.117-125.
4.DESANCTIS(Valerio),Lettred’Italie(1947),60LeDroitd’Auteur124,at
pp.127-128.

5.DESANCTIS(Valerio),Lettred’Italie(1954),67LeDroitd’Auteur190,at
pp.194-195.
6.DESANCTIS(Valerio),Lettred’Italie(1955),68LeDroitd’Auteur124,at
p.126.
7.DESANCTIS(Valerio),Lettred’Italie(1958),71LeDroitd’Auteur185,at
p.190.

8.DESANCTIS(Valerio),Lettred’Italie(1966),79LeDroitd’Auteur75,at
p.86.
9.Étudesgénérales—Lespropositions,contre-propositionset
observations[1936]49LeDroitd’Auteur91,atp.93-94.
10.Étudesgénérales—LestravauxpréparatoiresdelaConférencede
Bruxelles[1934]47LeDroitd’Auteur13,atpp.15-16.

11.FRANÇON(André),L’ArrangementdeVienneconcernantla
protectiondescaractèrestypographiquesetleurdépôtinternational
(1976),89LeDroitd’Auteur134;TheViennaAgreementforthe
ProtectionofTypeFaceandtheirInternationalDeposit(1976),12
Copyright129.
12.LIPZYC(Delia),Protectionlégaledestitresdesœuvreslittéraireset
artistiquesetdespublications.Droitd’auteuretdroitdesmarques
(1982),95LeDroitd’Auteur260;LegalProtectionofTitlesofLiterary
andAristicWorksandPublicaitons:CopyrightandTrademarkLaw
[1982],Copyright268.

%(

13.PAPACONSTANTINOU(Helen),LegalProtectionfortheTitlesofLiterary
Works:AComparativeStudy(1965),4ColumbiaJournalof
TransnationalLaw28.

14.RICKETSON(Sam),TheBerneConventionfortheProtectionofLiterary
andArtisticWorks:1886-1986(London,CentreforCommercialLaw
Studies,1987),atnos.6.80-6.81.
15.STERLING(J.A.L.),IntellectualPropertyRightsinSoundRecordings,Film
&Video(London,Sweet&Maxwell,1992),atnos.5.16and5.17.
16.STEWART(StephenM.),etal.,InternationalCopyrightand
NeighbouringRights,2nded.(London,Butterworths,1989),atnos.
5.30-5.31.
17.STRATMANN(Holger),ProtectionofSoftwareTitlesundertheNew
GermanTrademarksAct(1995),79TrademarkWorld11.
§8.6.2Arts&Techniques
1.COOPER(Douglas),TheyearMozartandSidVicioussharedanoffice
inNewYork:JonathanHoeflerandBarryDeckaretheold
couple/godsofdigitaltypedesignMarch1995Wired130.
§9.0Varia
§9.1CanadaCopyrightOfficeCircularNo.8—1997-10-01
UnprotectedItems:Ideas,Titles,NamesandSlogans

Ideasarenotprotectedbycopyright.Copyrightdoesextendtotheformof
expressionusedbyanauthorinconveyingorexplaininghisorherideasbut
doesnotextendtotheideasthemselveswhichbecomepublicproperty
themomenttheyaredisclosed.
InordertobeeligibleforprotectionundertheCopyrightAct,aworkmust
containaminimalamountoforiginalcreativeauthorship,beitinthe
literary,musicalorartisticfields.Slogans,shortphrasesandnamesdonot
usuallymeetthisrequirementandaregenerallynotprotectedunder
copyrightlegislation.
Atitleisusedtoidentifyaworkandisnotusually,initself,protectedby
copyright.

%)

Names,words,symbolsordesignsusedinassociationwithortoidentify,
goodsorservicesareeligibleforprotectionundertheTrade-marksAct.Any
inquiriesinthatrespectshouldbedirectedtotheTrade-marksOffice,part
oftheCanadianIntellectualPropertyOffice.
Thisinformationistobeconsideredsolelyasaguideandshouldnotbe
quotedas,orconsideredtobe,alegalauthority.Itmaybecomeobsolete
withoutnotice.AuthoritymustbefoundintheCopyrightAct,theCopyright
RegulationsandinthedecisionsoftheCourtsinterpretingthem.

§9.2USCopyrightOfficeCircularNo.34—November1997
Names,Titles,andShortPhrasesNotProtectedbyCopyright

Names,titles,andshortphrasesorexpressionsarenotsubjecttocopyright
protection.Evenifaname,title,orshortphraseisnovelordistinctiveor
lendsitselftoaplayonwords,itcannotbeprotectedbycopyright.The
CopyrightOfficecannotregisterclaimstoexclusiverightsinbrief
combinationsofwords,suchas:
•Namesofproductsorservices
•Namesofbusinesses,organizations,orgroups(includingthenameof
agroupofperformers)
•Namesofpseudonymsofindividuals(includingpennameorstage
name)
•Titlesofworks
•Catchwords,catchphrases,mottoes,slogans,orshortadvertising
expressions
•Merelistingsofingredients,asinrecipes,labels,orformulas.Whena
recipeorformulaisaccompaniedbyexplanationordirections,the
textdirectionsmaybecopyrightable,buttherecipeorformulaitself
remainsuncopyrightable.

SUBJECTMATTEROFCOPYRIGHT

Copyrightprotectionunderthecopyrightcode(title17,section102,U.S.
Code),extendsonlyto“originalworksofauthorship.”Thestatutestates
clearlythatideasandconceptscannotbeprotectedbycopyright.Tobe
protectedbycopyright,aworkmustcontainatleastacertainminimum
amountofauthorshipintheformoforiginalliterary,musical,pictorial,or
graphicexpression.Names,titles,andothershortphrasesdonotmeet
theserequirements.

%”

COPYRIGHTOFFICERECORESLISTEDALPHABETICALLYBYTITLE

Thetitlesofregisteredworksarefiledalphabeticallyandappearinthat
orderintheindexesandcataloguesoftheCopyrightOffice.
ThesefilesmaybeexaminedthoughLOCIS(LibraryofCongressInformation
System).AccesstoLOCISrequiresTelnetsupport.Ifyouronlineservice
providersupportsTelnet,youcanconnecttoLOCISthoughtheWorldWide
WebordirectlybyusingTelnet.
WorldWideWeb:http://www.loc.gov/copyright
Telnet:locis.loc.gov
Gopher:marvel.loc.gov(port70)

IfyouronlineserviceproviderdoesnotsupportTelnet,addressyour
concernsdirectlytotheprovider.
However,thepresenceofatitleintheCopyrightOfficeregistrationrecords
doesnotmeanthatthetitleitselfiscopyrightedorsubjecttocopyright
protection.Inmanycases,ourrecordsshowthesameorcloselysimilartitles
forentirelydifferentworks.

PROTECTIONUNDERTRADEMARKORUNFAIRCOMPETITIONLAWS

Somebrandnames,tradenames,slogans,andphrasesmaybeentitledto
protectionunderthegeneralrulesoflawrelatingtounfaircompetition,or
theymaybeentitledtoprotectionandregistrationundertheprovisionsof
stateorFederaltrademarklaws.TheFederaltrademarkstatutecovers
trademarksandservicemarks—thosewords,phrases,symbolsordesigns
thatidentifythesourceofthegoodsorservicesofonepartyanddistinguish
themfromthoseofothers.TheCopyrightOfficehasnoroleinthesematters.

($

ROBIC,ungroupedavocatsetdagentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommerce
vouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelle
danstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesde
commerce,marquesdecertificationetappellationsdorigine;droitsdauteur,
propriétélittéraireetartistique,droitsvoisinsetdelartisteinterprète;informatique,
logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,pharmaceutiquesetobtentions
végétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchiseset
transfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;
marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérification
diligenteetaudit;etce,tantauCanadaquailleursdanslemonde.Lamaîtrisedes
intangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicatedsince
1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:
patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksand
indicationsoforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,
neighbouringrights;computer,softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,
pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,know-how,competitionand
anti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,distribution
andbusinesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationand
arbitration;duediligence;inCanadaandthroughouttheworld.Ideaslivehere.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLULINVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTOTHE
WORLD