One type of media gets the (government) goldmine, the other gets the shaft.

Blacklocks- Password Sharing OK: Judge

“There is a significant public interest in reading articles with a view to protecting the public and the press against errors and omissions,” wrote the Court. Federal lawyers in the case justified password sharing under the guise of fact-checking. No errors or omissions in Blacklock’s stories were cited.

Blacklock’s caught Parks Canada managers circulating a single password by email. “The Court accepts that Parks Canada was subject to Blacklock’s terms,” said Barry Sookman, senior counsel with McCarthy Tetrault LLP

Records showed Manager Patenaude shared the password with at least nine others and offered it to anyone who asked.

Michael Geist- Huge Win for Copyright User Rights in Canada: Federal Court Rules Digital Lock Rules Do Not Trump Fair Dealing

Blacklock’s position on this issue was straightforward: it argued that its content was protected by a password, that passwords constituted a form of technological protection measure, and that fair dealing does not apply in the context of circumvention. In other words, it argued that the act of circumvention (in this case of a password) was itself infringing and it could not be saved by fair dealing.

The Federal Court disagreed on all points. It cited with approval CIPPIC’s argument that “the TPM provisions do not apply to restrain fair dealing; using a validly obtained password to access content is not circumvention.” Further, court noted “how the password was obtained is significant as this may prevent a user from invoking the fair dealing provisions of the Act.” In other words, not all password sharing will qualify as fair dealing. This decision is not a licence to simply share passwords with no consequences, but rather affirmation that passwords are not a technological protection measure and that using validly obtained password does not limit fair dealing rights.