Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet & E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law has reviewed a recent BC court decision. The court forces people who have legally purchased an inadvertently available copy of a Harry Potter book to return the book or face legal action.
* The freedom to read (the order restrains reading the book).
* The freedom of expression (the order restrains discussing any aspect of the book).
* The freedom associated with personal property (the order compels anyone who has the book to return it, along with any notes, to Raincoast books).
This is all done purely in the name of furthering commercial interests. In Canada, we have some narrow restrictions on hate speech and child pornography. But we do not issue court orders that prohibit children from reading books.
For a judge to issue such a blantantly unconstitutional order is appalling. For a book publisher and a children’s author to request such an order, is shameful. We should tell them so.
I agree with Geist. Why should commercial interests be put ahead of our constitutional rights? If the courts don’t look after the rights of those without the money to appeal this decision, then who will? Perhaps this is something that our Senate should look into, since the Senate purports to represent minority rights, such as those of children.
You can contact Raincoast Books.
17 July: Michael Geist follows up with more bad news for our constitutional rights.
