Tariff 22 in its latest iteration from the Copyright Board was broken down into several separate cases for judicial review purposes last year in the Federal Court of Appeal. Tariff 22 had already been to the Supreme Court of Canada once. It deals generally with music on the internet and has provided substantial remuneration for several lawyers since 1995. The end game is still nowhere in sight.
In many respects, the CMEC case would have seemed the most likely of all these cases to be granted leave to appeal. It is the natural counterpart to the SOCAN previews case - coming to an apparently inconsistent conclusion and emanating from the same Court at about the same time. It arguably involves a far more general and important issue - namely the parameters of fair dealing in education - than the iTunes "previews" case. However, it is the one that is being held in suspense - as are the many observers watching it with great interest.
A possible explanation of what is transpiring is that the Supreme Court of Canada has decided to deal with the Tariff 22 internet cases together and is treating the CMEC case as a stand alone matter. The CMEC case does not directly involve the internet.
The Court also granted leave to appeal yesterday on another internet related case yesterday involving whether ISPs can be "broadcasters".
From March 21, 2011:
Two cases bubbling up from last years' round of judicial review decisions concerning the apparently never ending SOCAN Tariff 22 saga concern whether certain activity on the internet constitutes a "communication to the public by telecommunication". These applications are brought by the ESA and Rogers et al.