Lawyers opposing Blacklock’s Reporter in the Federal Court of Appeal abruptly deleted social media posts on the case. The Law Society of Ontario advises lawyers to avoid being “petty” or “intemperate” on social media platforms.
James Plotkin, counsel for a pro-government intervenor against Blacklock’s, deleted a LinkedIn post stating: “‘Riddled with mistakes’ is a risky stone to throw from a glass house ;).” Plotkin is a partner with Gowling WLG of Ottawa that last year received $723,824 in federal contracts.
Alexander Gay, senior counsel for the Department of Justice, also deleted a LinkedIn post stating: “Nothing like an appeal to sort it all out. Happy to meet any daring soul in a courtroom.”
Blacklock’s on Friday filed an appeal in the case. The Law Society of Ontario in a guideline Public Appearances And Statements recommends that lawyers avoid making snide remarks on social media.
“Licensees should avoid any criticism that is petty, intemperate or without merit,” says Public Appearances. “Licensees should always bear in mind their position in society can lend their opinions greater weight in the eye of the public and that they will ordinarily have no control over the context in which statements they make are used by the media.”
Blacklock’s is challenging a May 31 lower court ruling that federal managers could lawfully share passwords to paywalled stories without payment or permission. The decision came in the case of a Parks Canada manager Genevieve Patenaude caught sharing her Blacklock’s password with any co-worker who asked, at least nine people, “if you ever need to access any Blacklock’s article.”
Counsel Gay, the senior federal lawyer in the case, slandered Blacklock’s as a copyright troll following the May 31 ruling. “That’s the business model,” Gay was quoted in an interview with the periodical lawyer Canadian Lawyer.
Federal Court Justice Yvan Roy specifically dismissed the slander. “The Attorney General forcefully suggested Blacklock’s modus operandi is akin to copyright tolling which is described as copyright holders using the threat of litigation to generate revenue,” wrote Justice Roy.
“I was not inclined to consider further any allegation of copyright trolling perhaps with a view to implying an abuse of copyright,” wrote Justice Roy. “Having considered again the evidence before the Court I continue to disregard such assertions.”
Hugh Stephens, former assistant deputy trade minister, said in a commentary that remarks by the Department of Justice against Blacklock’s were an obvious tactic. “Not only has the Attorney General taken a hard line on this case it has also tried to blacken Blacklock’s reputation by accusing it of entrapment and being a copyright troll,” wrote Stephens.
“Blacklock’s had to resort to Access To Information requests to learn how many government employees had accessed the single subscription they had authorized,” wrote Stephens. “The judge in the case explicitly expressed dismissed these allegations, noting Blacklock’s had no intent to deceive.”
By Staff 
