Evidence of meeting #14 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was copyright.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Abbott Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
Yes, the third part of Madame Bouvet's answer that there is a third element, was there not?
5 p.m.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
Are you talking about outflow? You raised the issue on national treatment.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Mr. Abbott, maybe you can ask more questions in the next round.
I'm going to Mr. Bélanger first, and then we can come back to this side, and then we can go to Mr. Angus, because I think Mr. Angus has a couple more questions.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
A sure sign that one is aging is when one doesn't keep up with the technology, Mr. Chairman. I figure if that's a sure sign, then I'm really aging. I've just had a good discussion with my colleague Madam Keeper. She referred to how, even two or three years ago, technology that is commonly talked about today and commonly used wasn't even talked about then--podcasting, for instance.
Would it be useful for us as a committee, Mr. Chairman...? I appreciate the two briefings we've had now on the history of and the more recent changes to copyright legislation in this country. I know it would be very useful for me, and if it's not going to be offered by the committee then I'll venture to.... Due to the simple fact that I mention it today, I'm sure I'm going to get two or three calls tomorrow, offering me this briefing.
Would it be of use to have a more technical briefing in terms of the current technology the industries are using, whether it's television or recording and broadcasting or radio or copying or whatever, and perhaps with a tag in terms of the copyright considerations of each technology and the copyright battlegrounds, if you will, so we have some sort of flow chart of the difficulties we'll be facing as a committee, or that the government's currently trying to come to grips with, as they flow from technology and fit in our international obligations? We can't just legislate in a vacuum; we have to be aware and mindful of the impact we would have on our international obligations, so we need some sort of flow chart that gives us the entire stream of this, from technology, to international obligations, to the battlegrounds as we see them.
I don't know if that even exists, or if it's asking too much, but I suspect it might greatly facilitate the work of our committee when we get legislation.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
I can go back to Mr. Abbott.
Do you have more questions, Mr. Abbott?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Actually, I very much support the comment from Mr. Bélanger. I'd like to see that as well, so that we understand them. What are the issues relating to each of these technologies as they relate to copyright? For example, I've never used podcasting. I have a rough idea of what it is, but I have no idea what the copyright issues related to it are. That would be very helpful.
I have just one quick question. Have you any idea of the annual losses that industry suffers as a result of not having an up-to-date copyright law in Canada? Surely some of those studies will have been done either by industry or by government.
5:05 p.m.
Director, Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
The issue is one of correlation and how you relate all the factors that may contribute to the well-being of a particular industry in a particular economic environment. We try as best we can to get data on the impact of our policy choices, but again, establishing a correlation is a very tricky thing, a very dangerous game.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
For the moment, just drop the correlation. In terms of total industry losses, do we have a ballpark figure of what that might be?
5:05 p.m.
Director, Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
I think what I'm trying to suggest is that it is very hard to look at the profits or losses of any particular industry and try to attribute those to a particular policy choice, because there are so many factors. To give you an example, if one industry may not do so well, is it because of copyright policy or is it because of the availability of other substitutes in the marketplace that may be taking its place? Is it due to a general downturn in the economy? Is it due to other factors?
Again, how you attribute it to the particular copyright policy is a very difficult undertaking, I would say.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
But surely there would have been some studies done either by industry or by government, say, in the recording industry. What losses do they suffer annually from individuals illegally copying, ripping, downloading, etc.?
5:05 p.m.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
I hope that my answer will be helpful. It is clear that over the past few years, various industries have all produced reports that illustrate the scope of the phenomena of copyright infringement and piracy.
At the international level, the OECD, the economic organization, is attempting to assess the scope of these phenomena. I also know that the greatest problem facing this organization is exactly what my colleague, Albert Cloutier, referred to, that is figuring out what methodology should be used in order to obtain the best data to give us a measure of the scope of the phenomena.
Several reports have been published. I do not remember the exact numbers in these studies, however several studies or reports published over the past few years have referred to the scope of this problem. Of course, those who differ over this data will say that the figures are inflated, that the methodology was not appropriate and is unsuitable for the problem we are facing.
We take these studies into account. Furthermore, Canada is involved in international research into these phenomena. A few years ago, the World Intellectual Property Organization even conducted a study with a view to assisting the various member States in measuring the scope of these phenomena.
Over the past few years, we at Canadian Heritage have conducted studies in an attempt to measure the economic impact of copyright in general on copyright. Those studies are available on our website and I would be happy to provide you with the specific references in the next few days, if you so wish.
I know that work has been done on this issue. However, the problem often lies in the methodology. Copyright being what it is, that is, an area where consensus is rare, we often end up with studies that are challenged. In our capacity as officials in these departments, we must take the best of these in order to provide some direction on what would be useful in crafting policies.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
I think Mr. Fast is getting at the heart of the problem, which is our trying to develop laws that look forward when all we can do is look back, and what impact that will have on innovation. We suggest that even within the last three years, since I came on the copyright file, things have changed dramatically. For example, in the music industry, I know of many Canadian bands that are now suddenly international superstars. They attribute that to the quick ability of fans to get music legally, technically, or illegally, and the creation of new markets that three years ago didn't even exist.
How are we, when we're looking at this, responding to the needs of forward-looking legislation? For example, have there been any moves to outlaw peer-to-peer technology? That has been identified as a big source of illegal trade in both music and movies. It's also an emerging technology that we haven't really even come to terms with in respect of its possibility for creating new markets. What's the balance that's happening right now with Industry Canada in terms of examining, say, peer-to-peer as a threat, or as a potential new market?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
I think you're right. The issue of peer-to-peer as a technology I'm not sure we have looked at as the focal point of copyright policy, in the sense of saying that the technology is the problem. In a sense, peer-to-peer technology, as we understand it, is a file-sharing mechanism and can't speak to whether the content is infringing or non-infringing. I think what we've tried to do in our policies is to acknowledge the reality of peer-to-peer file sharing in the sense that it's enabling an infringing activity. How can you get to the infringing activity while still allowing the beneficial uses that peer-to-peer technology may provide, not only in other contexts but in the copyright context as well, in terms of developing a marketplace?
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Has there been any representation or push to put strict limitations on the developing of peer-to-peer technology?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
I have to say I'm not aware of pushes that target that technology as such.
If we want to look historically at Bill C-60, if you look at the Internet service provider provisions, for example, we crafted a notice and notice regime in part because we thought that was a better way for ISPs to participate, to address peer-to-peer technology. In the U.S. they had developed a notice and takedown regime, but takedown doesn't really apply to a peer-to-peer scenario. So we try to acknowledge that maybe a notice and notice regime was something that could address that kind of technology.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I didn't really get a clear answer on where we're going with fair use. I have to say I'm feeling a bit like I'm on the old Front Page Challenge show, because I'm not sure what we're asking of you, whether we're talking about an old bill or whether we're talking about a new bill, or whether we're talking about what we might do or what other people have done. We're not very clear here, so I want to go back to fair use.
Let's put it in context. If I wrote an article 20 years ago--and I did, and it was in a textbook--I would get paid for its use in a school, for which I have been paid. So students would get x number of textbooks and they would photocopy x number of copies. It's very easy to see.
Now students go on the Internet, and they aren't stealing materials, they're going to free websites that post amazing educational materials for free and fair use. So in some ways that's made the book almost irrelevant. There's been a real question about how we are going to remunerate, first of all, the people who still rely on the book, or how we are going to ensure that the electronic communication of students is not infringing on copyright.
My colleague had talked about young people having a culture of entitlement. They definitely do. They expect that they can go on the Internet and learn anything they want in the world, and I think they should have that right. I want to make sure, though, that there is a system in place in terms of remuneration but also to make sure that the fair and open use of the Internet is not being charged.
How have your departments dealt with this? It will be one of the key areas of new legislation in terms of educational use of the Internet and fair use of the Internet. What models have you looked at?
5:15 p.m.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
I feel old. In fact, I always get the impression that I am referring to the past because it is difficult to talk about what will happen in the future. Within the framework of the work we have been involved with over the past few years, we considered certain amendments whose purpose was to make the work of teachers and students easier.
Earlier my colleague referred to three main areas, the first of which involved measures that would help teachers and students benefit from distance education. We looked at the possibility of a teacher giving a course to a class and using various works protected under the Copyright Act, interacting with the students even if they are not physically in the same classroom, and obtaining works over the Internet, without breaching the Copyright Act.
We also considered measures that would allow schools to acquire material protected under the Copyright Act and under a licence granted either by Access Copyright or COPIBEC. That material would allow schools to reproduce certain works under specific conditions. We looked at the possibility of those schools digitizing and sending that material to their students over the Internet.
The last area we looked at involved library loans. Once again, providing digital access to material makes the work of library clients easier.
Those are the measures that were considered and that are still on the table. These are measures that could make the work of schools, researchers, libraries, archives and museums easier.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Yes, I just need to clarify.
For copywritten materials, there would be a levy fee similar to what's in place now with access copyright. But what about the educational use of the general Internet? Will there be levy fees? Have they been talked about in order to catch anything else that's going in the stream?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
The issue is being studied because teachers believe that it is essential that any reform of the Copyright Act should include provisions that allow students and teachers to have Internet access. We are looking into this issue. There will be a decision about amendments that could settle the matter through the coming reform.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Thank you.
As chair, I have a couple of little questions, and I'm going to be short. This was one of my previous questions, probably two years ago.
We talk about streamlining the process. In this process, there was signing of the WIPO treaty 10 years ago. We've been five years in progress, getting the short-term things done, the short-, medium-, and long-term issues. Did Bill C-60 only look after the short term? If that's the case, and if it's taken 10 years, how long is it going to be before the long-term issues are addressed?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
This is a difficult question, Mr. Chairman. The issues are very complex, as you can see. The new government needs time to adapt to them and properly estimate the scope of the amendments. It must become familiar with the various issues. All we want is to act as promptly as possible. But the issue is very complicated.