E-TIPS

The recent imposition of tariffs by the United States may assist anti-counterfeiting efforts, both in the United States and Canada. The imposition of tariffs themselves will likely only have a minor effect on the flow of counterfeit goods, as counterfeiters have not been known to play by the rules and are not likely to accurately describe the origin and value of the goods that they sell. In many cases, since the goods are produced at low cost, the counterfeiters can either absorb any tariffs payable or even pay the tariffs and still sell their products below the cost of genuine articles.

On April 28, 2025, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (collectively, the Offices) issued a joint letter to the US trustee overseeing 23andMe Holding Co.’s (23andMe) bankruptcy proceedings, highlighting privacy protection requirements under Canadian and UK privacy laws (the Letter).

On April 28, 2025 the U.S. House of Representatives passed the bipartisan, bicameral bill titled the “Take it Down Act” (the Bill). The Bill is aimed at combating deepfake pornography by requiring social media platforms to remove explicit images found on their sites.

On April 10, 2025, the Federal Court (the Court) issued its decision in Aria Vent Inc v 2213785 Ontario Inc, 2025 FC 672, dismissing 2213785 Ontario Inc. and TRM Holding Inc.’s (collectively, the Defendants’) motion to enforce a settlement agreement between the Defendants and Plaintiffs (Aria Vent Inc. and 2721111 Ontario Inc.) to settle claims of copyright infringement for the Defendants’ unauthorized use of a Plaintiff image in its catalogue and price list.

On April 1, 2025 a working group of lawyers and judges released its Phase 2 Consultation Paper ( the “Paper”) proposing a massive overhaul to the rules which govern litigation in Ontario, the Rules of Civil Procedure. The proposed reforms would apply to all civil cases in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, excluding the Small Claims Court. Modifications would also apply to certain types of proceedings such as bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings. The Paper follows the working group’s Phase 1 Report, released in May 2024, which outlined potential areas of focus for reform.

On April 22, 2025, the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC) released an interpretation bulletin (the Bulletin) on the handling of correction requests received by public institutions. These requests may be submitted by an individual to correct the personal information that an institution holds on them in accordance with sections 47(2) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act or 36(2) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (collectively, the Acts).

On April 14, 2025, the Federal Court (the Court) issued its decision in ITP SA v CNOOC Petroleum North America ULC, 2025 FC 684, dismissing ITP SA’s (the Applicant) application alleging that CNOOC Petroleum North America ULC (the Respondent) infringed the Applicant’s copyright in an image of its concentric “pipe-in-pipe” system through its use in a presentation to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) for a pipeline project.

After decades of urging by Canadian trademark professionals to change the regime involving official marks in Canada, a significant change came into effect on April 1, 2025. Official marks are a somewhat unique creature of Canadian trademark law. Pursuant to section 9 of Canada’s Trademarks Act (the “Act”), the Registrar of Trademarks may give public notice of the adoption and use by public authorities of official marks. Once such notice is given, it is prohibited in Canada for anyone to adopt a trademark which is the same as or likely to be mistaken for the official mark.

On March 26, 2025, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) announced that a new online tool is now available to assist organizations in assessing the likelihood of whether a privacy breach creates a real risk of significant harm (RROSH) to individuals.

On March 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court) issued its decision in Thaler v Perlmutter, affirming the findings of a lower court and the United States Copyright Office (the Office) that works produced solely by generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) do not attract copyright protection, as an AI system cannot be an “author” under the United States’s Copyright Act of 1976 (the Act).

On April 1, 2025, the Federal Court (the Court) issued its decision in Ecolab USA Inc. v. 2431717 Ontario Inc. (3D Eco Chemical Labs Canada), 2025 FC 595, partially granting a motion for default judgment in favour of the Plaintiff, Ecolab USA Inc., and restricting the Defendant, 3D Eco Chemical Labs Canada, from using various ECO and LAB formative marks (the Defendant Marks) in association with cleaning and disinfecting products.

On February 18, 2025, the Québec Commission d’accès à l’information (the CAI) issued a decision prohibiting Metro Inc. (Metro) from establishing a bank of biometric data for a pilot project aimed at preventing shoplifting and fraud.

On March 18, 2025, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) published further guidance on the amendments to the Trademarks Act (the Act) and the Trademarks Regulations (the Regulations) that confer new authorities on the Registrar of Trademarks (the Registrar). The newest guidance from CIPO provides additional information about the amendments relating to official marks.

On March 6, 2025, the Government of Canada (the Government) announced three new initiatives aimed at promoting the responsible and secure adoption of artificial intelligence (AI). These initiatives include a refreshed membership for the Advisory Council on AI, the launch of the Safe and Secure AI Advisory Group, and the release of a guide for managers of AI systems to support the implementation of Canada’s Voluntary Code of Conduct on the Responsible Development and Management of Advanced Generative AI Systems (the Voluntary Generative AI Code).

Neurotechnology is rapidly advancing into the consumer market with devices like brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) and electroencephalogram (EEG) headsets becoming more accessible to individuals. In addition to offering groundbreaking possibilities, the rapid growth of this technology has triggered alarm bells across the globe regarding whether adequate privacy protections are in place for consumer data. This article explores the rise of neurotechnology, its privacy implications, and global regulatory efforts to address these challenges.

On February 26, 2025, the Regulations Amending the Trademarks Regulations (the Regulations) were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II. The Regulations come into force on April 1, 2025.

On March 3, 2025, The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (the OPC) announced that it filed an application with the Federal Court (the Court) seeking an order to require Aylo, one of the world’s largest operators of pornographic sites, including Pornhub, to take necessary steps to comply with Canada’s federal private sector privacy law, the Personal Information and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).

On February 18, 2025, the Federal Court (the Court) issued its decision in Chwaja v. 0710674 BC Ltd. (Cottonmouth), 2025 FC 312, which upheld a Trademark Opposition Board (TMOB) decision that declared a trademark application for the mark “Cotton Mouth” (the Application) abandoned; and noted that the TMOB lacked jurisdiction to revisit its own decisions once final.

On February 21, 2025, the Federal Court of Canada (the Court) issued its decision in Provexis Nutrition Limited v. Robichaud, 2025 FC 347, allowing an appeal from a decision of the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) expunging Provexis Nutrition Limited’s (the Applicant’s) trademark registration for FRUITFLOW & Design (the Mark).

On February 11, 2025, the Government of Canada (the Government) published its report summarizing the feedback received from a recent consultation regarding the effects of generative artificial intelligence (AI) on copyright policy and the marketplace. Overall, the Government found a lack of consensus among stakeholders for most identified issues, though there was a significant interest in improving transparency for copyright-protected content used in AI development.