November 9, 2016
The balance between the public’s interest in accessing offshore petroleum resources data and operators’ commercial interests is at the heart of the dispute between Geophysical Service Incorporated (GSI) and Encana Corporation (and a number of others). In April 2016, Alberta’s superior court decided just where the law strikes that balance. But that could change: on November 9, 2016, the Alberta Court of Appeal will hear GSI’s appeal and the outcome will either end years of uncertainty and litigation or expose the boards and many others to significant liability, threaten public access to seismic and other data and lead to a proliferation of similar litigation – including possible appeals to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Here’s the balance the court struck and the implications of that balance being thrown off.
THE CURRENT BALANCING ACT
GSI obtained seismic data through offshore marine surveys in the Atlantic and Arctic waters. It licences that seismic data to oil and gas companies primarily for exploration purposes. As a condition of regulatory approval for the surveys and as required by legislation and policy, GSI submitted the seismic data to the National Energy Board (NEB), the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB) and the Canada-Nova Scotia Petroleum Board (CNSOPB). After the expiry of the confidentiality periods in the legislation, the boards publicly released copies of the data. GSI started 25 lawsuits in Alberta against the NEB, the CNLOPB and numerous exploration, production and other companies claiming (among other things) it owns the copyright in the data, and these parties infringed that copyright by disclosing or copying the date without GSI’s consent. GSI started similar lawsuits in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and in the Federal Court. The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench ordered a trial of two issues common to the 25 Alberta cases: whether seismic data can be copyrighted; and the effect of the offshore regulatory regimes on that copyright. On April 21, 2016, the Alberta court decided just where the balance between the public’s interest in access to Canada’s offshore petroleum resources data, and operators’ commercial interests lies:
Seismic data can be protected by copyright. The court agreed that seismic data can be, and normally would, be protected by copyright. The data comprised both raw and processed seismic data and could constitute original “works” within the meaning of the Copyright Act: seismic crews used the necessary “skill and judgment” when designing and conducting surveys and processors of raw data used skill and judgment to create a useable final product.
The offshore petroleum regulatory regime overrides that copyright. The court decided, however, that after the expiration of a statutory confidentiality period, the legislation governing offshore petroleum activities allows the regulatory boards to disclose – and the public to copy – the seismic data:
THROWING THE BALANCE OFF
This dispute reveals the tension that exists between the public interest in disseminating data about Canada’s offshore petroleum resources, and seismic operators’ interest in covering its costs and profiting from its enterprise. And the real life impact is already being felt: two months after this decision, the Alberta court followed it in deciding a photocopy company (612469 Alberta Limited) isn’t liable for copying GSI data that it accessed from the NEB.
This is the first time a court has confirmed that copyright can subsist in seismic data. However, it merely validates industry supposition and the common practice of including in seismic license agreements an express acknowledgement by the licensee that the seismic data is copyrighted.
The dispute over the regulatory regime’s effect, however, is far more significant and an outcome that throws the balance off carries big implications for industry regulators and participants and the public:
A failed appeal. On one hand, if the decision survives this (any any subsequent) appeal, it will confirm the industry understanding that seismic data submitted to the boards can be freely copied after the confidentiality period expires. And this will end years of uncertainty and costly litigation.
A successful appeal. On the other hand, if the decision is overturned, the boards and anyone who has copied GSI’s data may be exposed to significant liability: GSI’s collective claims approach $1B. It could also lead to a proliferation of similar claims: the current offshore regulatory regime requires the submission, and permits disclosure, of information about all sorts of topics (including exploratory, delineation and development wells exploratory wells, delineation wells, development wells, geological work, engineering or feasibility studies, contingency planning and diving reports). And aside from the money at stake, the ability of the boards, industry and the public to access submitted seismic data for regulatory, exploratory, research or other purposes is threatened and this information won’t be available for wider public access and use.
Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of the Energy & Natural Resources Team @ McInnes Cooper to discuss this topic or any other legal issue.
McInnes Cooper has prepared this document for information only; it is not intended to be legal advice. You should consult McInnes Cooper about your unique circumstances before acting on this information. McInnes Cooper excludes all liability for anything contained in this document and any use you make of it.
© McInnes Cooper, 2016. All rights reserved. McInnes Cooper owns the copyright in this document. You may reproduce and distribute this document in its entirety as long as you do not alter the form or the content and you give McInnes Cooper credit for it. You must obtain McInnes Cooper’s consent for any other form of reproduction or distribution. Email us at [email protected] to request our consent.
Jan 22, 2025
On November 12, 2024, the Hague Court of Appeal quashed the 2021 landmark decision of the Hague District Court in Milieudefensie et al v. Royal…
Aug 26, 2024
On June 20, 2024, the Canadian Competition Act was amended to specifically make greenwashing claims reviewable conduct. Pressure on Canadian…
Aug 22, 2024
In early April 2024, Nova Scotia’s Energy Reform (2024) Act (Bill 404) passed, marking the beginning of a new direction for Nova Scotia’s…
Feb 23, 2024
On January 24, 2024, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court upheld the N.S. Environment Minister’s approval of a proposed windfarm development’s…
Nov 1, 2023
On October 13, 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its judicial reference opinion: a significant portion of Canada’s federal…
Aug 8, 2023
We updated this publication on August 10, 2023. The Nova Scotia commercial net-metering regime just took another step toward implementation.…
Jan 25, 2023
Buzz around the potential of hydrogen as a green energy source has been growing. And the Atlantic Canadian provinces are poised to become a key…
Nov 10, 2022
Updated August 8, 2023. October 2022 amendments to the N.S. Renewable Electricity Regulations ushered in a new Commercial Net-metering regime…
Jun 24, 2022
The New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench has issued a court order to stop Indigenous fishers (all apparently members of the Wolastoqey Nation)…
Jun 6, 2022
The Federal Court’s April 22, 2022 decision in Mowi Canada West Inc. v. Canada (Fisheries, Oceans and Coast Guard) has implications for the…
Feb 3, 2022
On January 26, 2022, the British Columbia Court of Appeal extended an injunction preventing protesters from interfering with a logging…
Nov 10, 2021
On November 5, 2021, the Province of Nova Scotia passed the Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act. The Act will serve as the…
Jul 27, 2021
Canadian entities regularly contract with foreign companies to provide services in Canada. To complete its obligations under the contract, the…
Jun 1, 2021
NOTE: On November 12, 2024, the Hague Court of Appeal quashed the decision of the Hague District Court in Milieudefensie et al v. Royal Dutch…
Jan 20, 2021
We updated this publication on July 8, 2022. 2020 was a year filled with challenges, including in the relationship between Indigenous…
Dec 22, 2020
The long-awaited amendments to federal fisheries regulations codifying key aspects of the Department of Fisheries & Oceans (DFO) PIIFCAF…
Feb 12, 2020
Intellectual property (IP) can be a business’s most valuable (even only) asset. Once you’ve taken steps to understand what the five main IP…
Feb 11, 2020
Intellectual property (IP) can be an important source of revenue to a business. There are three main ways intellectual property (IP) owners…
Nov 22, 2019
The Environmental Emergency Regulations, effected under section 200(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and in force since…
Oct 31, 2017
Intellectual Property (IP) can be a valuable asset – even the most valuable asset – of a business. So it’s worth making sure the business…
Dec 7, 2016
Updated February 7, 2024. We live in a world of change. New ideas and new industries are rapidly developing and the list keeps growing: tidal…
Oct 19, 2016
Updated January 17, 2023. For many businesses, large and small, their “Intellectual Property” (IP) is one of their most valuable assets.…
Jun 6, 2016
Each Provincial government is under the legal duty to consult; the manner in which each carries out its legal duty to consult differs depending…
May 2, 2016
Updated October 4, 2023. Workplace accidents regularly lead to charges under occupational health and safety (OHS) law. These charges can be…
Apr 19, 2016
On April 14, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that Métis and “non-status Indians” are “Indians” under section 91(24) of the…
Mar 24, 2016
When a business responds to a public sector Request for Proposal or Expression of Interest (both of which we’ll refer to as an RFP for these…
Mar 9, 2016
On January 11, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice sentenced a front-line supervisor to imprisonment for 3½ years for four counts of…
Dec 21, 2015
A practical and current guide created to help you navigate the increasingly important issues surrounding offshore decommissioning and…
Jun 25, 2015
Updated October 4, 2023. Most people know a company itself has occupational health and safety (OHS) obligations and risks corporate liability…
Jun 26, 2014
On June 26, 2014, in its groundbreaking decision on Aboriginal title in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. B.C., the Supreme Court of Canada …
Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.