From Copyright to Contract: How User Rights Are Being Reshaped

Why It Matters

The trend erodes the balance between creators and users, limiting access to educational resources and stifling research across institutions.

Key Takeaways

• 90%+ library acquisitions now licensed, not owned
• Contracts often conflict with fair dealing exceptions
• TPMs block lawful copying even for research
• Negotiating rights adds cost and complexity for libraries
• Proposed law change to prevent contract overrides

Pulse Analysis

The migration to subscription‑based access has reshaped how students, researchers, and the public engage with cultural content. While licences promise instant availability, they also embed restrictive clauses that supersede traditional copyright exceptions such as fair dealing. In Canada, more than nine‑tenths of library collections are now accessed through digital contracts, turning librarians into negotiators who must parse divergent terms for each vendor. This contractual web complicates everyday tasks like interlibrary loans, excerpt copying, or text‑and‑data mining, and it raises compliance costs for institutions already facing budget pressures.

Legal scholars highlight a glaring gap: the Copyright Act grants users specific rights, yet it remains silent on whether those rights survive when a licence expressly prohibits them. Courts have yet to settle the conflict, prompting many institutions to err on the side of caution and avoid invoking fair dealing. Meanwhile, technological protection measures—passwords, download blocks, and print limits—enforce the contract’s restrictions at the technical level, often preventing even public‑domain works from being used. The combined effect is a de‑facto erosion of user freedoms, pushing libraries into a reactive stance of case‑by‑case negotiations with publishers.

Stakeholders argue that legislative reform is essential to restore equilibrium. Amendments could clarify that contractual terms cannot nullify statutory user rights and carve out safe‑harbor provisions for TPM circumvention in research and education contexts. Such changes would not only simplify librarians’ advisory roles but also reinforce the democratic goal of broad access to knowledge. As AI‑driven content creation intensifies and the public domain freezes, ensuring that contracts do not stifle legitimate uses becomes a strategic priority for the entire information ecosystem.