Canadian Heritage Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 11 of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

Before we begin, I see that all witnesses are with us in person today. You can see that there are guidelines written on the updated cards on your table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters. You will notice that there's a QR code on the card, which links to a short awareness video.

Pursuant to the routine motion adopted by this committee, I can confirm that all witnesses have completed the required connection tests, or they would have, had they been online today.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before you speak. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, September 22, the committee is meeting to study the effects of technological advances in AI on the creative industries.

With us today, we have Eric Chan, also known as EEPMON, who is a digital, generative artist.

From the Directors Guild of Canada, we have Warren Sonoda and Samuel Bischoff.

From the Entertainment Software Association of Canada, we have Paul Fogolin.

Welcome to all.

You will each have five minutes, except for the Directors Guild. You can share your five minutes, but that's the time allotted for opening statements.

Mr. Chan, I'll turn it over to you now for five minutes.

[Eric Chan, a.k.a. EEPMON, Digital Generative Artist, As an Individual]

Thank you, Madam Chair and honourable members.

Before I begin, I'd like to acknowledge that in eight days, on November 11, we will observe Remembrance Day. As we discuss the future of creative expression, I am mindful that the freedoms we defend today were secured by those who served: Lest we forget.

My name is Eric Chan, known artistically as EEPMON. I'm a digital, generative artist and Library and Archives Canada's inaugural creator in residence. One of my generative artworks as a result of my residency, entitled Constellations—The Flow of Belonging, was featured at the Canada Pavilion at Expo 2025 Osaka. In January 2026, I'll hold a solo exhibition at the Embassy of Canada to Japan's Prince Takamado Gallery.

I appreciate the invitation to speak on AI's impact on creative industries. I have four points that I would like to address.

Number one is that copyright fights predate AI by centuries. Let’s start with a simple truth: The tension between “copying to create” and “owning every fragment” is not an AI invention. Painters in the 18th century routinely copied master sketches in academia, sometimes stroke for stroke, before adding their twist. Jazz musicians riffed on standards. Hip-hop built empires on sampling. The only thing AI changes is scale, visibility and democratization of access. Suddenly, the same remixing logic that powered culture for 300 years is labelled “theft” because a machine does it in seconds.

Number two is that, speaking of speed, AI is the printing press of our era. Every leap in reproduction technology was called apocalyptic. Then it became infrastructure. In the 1400s, Gutenberg's press let ideas escape monasteries. Literacy exploded. Elites lost control.

In the mid-1800s, photography arrived. Painters hated it and panicked at losing their jobs: It's not art, it's a machine. Where portraits took months, it took seconds. Why paint when you can paint the perfect picture? Yet within decades, photography itself became fine art. In the 1960s, Andy Warhol's silkscreen studio mass-produced Marilyns and Campbell's cans on factory lines—exact copies of photos and corporate logos. Critics screamed that it was theft and the end of originality. Courts and culture shrugged. Pop art democratized symbols, putting soup-can art in the National Gallery of Canada.

Folks, AI is Decentralized Creativity 101. A teenager in rural New Brunswick can now generate album art, write lyrics or animate a short film without a $100,000 studio or a gatekeeper's blessing. That is accessibility, not piracy.

Number three is AI as a transformative tool for everyone. Yes, generative models train on public data, including copyrighted works, but so did every DJ who bought a vinyl crate, every painter who studied museum walls and every writer who read 10,000 novels. Let's be real: Design agencies have been right-click and saving my work for glorified client mood boards for years, calling it “research”. The fair dealing provisions in section 29 of the Copyright Act already allow transformative use for research, parody, education and criticism. AI outputs routinely meet that test; it's only that it's supercharged.

I am a generative artist. I write code to create visual art. I prompt AI to optimize—i.e., to increase frame rates or reduce memory leaks. The art stays mine. The code evolves via open-source patterns. This isn't theft. It's collaboration with the collectivism of coders. We're not losing art. We're gaining a medium—code as brush and AI as assistant. Calling this stealing misses the point: The paradigm, like Blockbuster Video, has shifted.

Number four is bridging the digital literacy gap in creative practice. Surprisingly, when I share my digital generative art creations, people still ask me if it's hand-drawn. That reflex exposes a deeper digital illiteracy. We've used graphical software for decades, yet many equate “real” art with acrylic on canvas. AI reveals how outdated our cultural perceptions remain.

In closing, AI didn't break copyright. It didn't steal. It reveals that our current system is functioning as it should, only now with accelerated and democratized access, so that anyone can create and remix. That's not the end for creators. That's innovation and empowerment in action. Let's treat this moment as an opportunity like the printing press—as a beginning, not doomsday, for creators.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Next, we'll turn to the Directors Guild of Canada.

Collectively, you have five minutes.

[Warren Sonoda, National President, Directors Guild of Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Warren Sonoda. I'm a Canadian film and TV director and the national president of the Directors Guild of Canada. With me is Samuel Bischoff, our director of policy.

The DGC is a national labour organization that represents over 7,000 professionals working in film, television and digital media across this country, including directors, assistant directors, editors, designers and many others who give life to Canadian stories.

I want to thank you for inviting us to appear as part of your study on the impact of artificial intelligence on Canada's creative industries.

We are at a crossroads today, with a collective choice to make. AI is an existential crisis that we must be prepared for, and it's moving fast. We believe that the Department of Heritage can act now to establish clear rules, create guidelines and compensate for the slow pace of legislation. We must remember one thing: There is no culture without human creators.

A recent Harris study indicated that nine out of 10 Canadians are concerned about deceptive AI-generated content as it spreads misleading or false information. All of our members are concerned by the lack of guardrails around the proliferation of synthetic media.

This is not about stifling innovation; our members have always been innovators, but technological tools have historically been in service of or in support of human creativity, not to replace it. We are entering a dangerous territory. We risk using unethical AI tools and opaque algorithms while facing legal uncertainty.

Can AI-generated images, sounds, sequences or entire films be protected by copyright, which is the foundational economic pillar of our industry? AI may assist, but it cannot be the author. It takes the creative selection and arrangement of AI-generated elements by a human to curate, structure, sequence or combine them with other materials to potentially qualify for copyright.

We urge the government to reaffirm a simple but fundamental principle. The author of a work must be human, and directors and writers are the primary authors. The integrity of Canadian culture depends on it.

[Samuel Bischoff, Director of Policy, Directors Guild of Canada]

We join the other witnesses in condemning the massive extraction of creative works. It is a direct attack on the value of creation. Our works of art and stories are being used to train artificial intelligence systems, or AI systems, without consent, acknowledgement or compensation. That is why we are asking for the following principles to be adopted:

There should be no exception for text and data mining; the copyright framework is sufficiently flexible as it is.

Transparency should be mandatory when creative works are being used to train generative AI models.

The author's consent should be obtained for their work to be used to train AI, and they should be acknowledged and compensated, which means it should be an opt-in approach, not an opt-out approach.

Canada can become a reliable jurisdiction for the ethical use of AI in culture. This would attract talent and investments, and build trust in Canadian content.

What does AI competitiveness mean for the screen sector?

It means establishing clear rules based on transparency, which means using labels indicating that the content was entirely generated by AI, so that the public knows what it is dealing with. It also means a clear understanding that public funds are not to be used to support or promote stories entirely generated by AI.

AI governance should be integral to our cultural policy. Canada can become a world leader by creating a balanced AI framework that brings together the Department of Industry and Canadian Heritage. Building trust and encouraging innovation are not incompatible objectives.

[Warren Sonoda]

The federal government has gone to great lengths to protect and grow our cultural industry and the screen-based sector. We thank you for that.

We cannot fathom a future for Canadian and indigenous narrative sovereignty taken over by artificial intelligence. We must defend against it. Canadians do not want a purely synthetic world where the human story is lost. We must tell it ourselves.

We look forward to questions during the question period.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Finally, we turn to Paul Fogolin from the Entertainment Software Association of Canada. You have five minutes, sir.

[Paul Fogolin, President and Chief Executive Officer, Entertainment Software Association of Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair and honourable members, for the invitation to appear before the committee as part of your study on artificial intelligence in the creative industries.

My name's Paul Fogolin. I'm the president and CEO of the Entertainment Software Association of Canada, which is also known as ESAC. We're the voice of Canada's video game industry, which includes publishers, developers and console makers. Our mission is to ensure that Canada remains a world-class environment for creating, innovating and publishing interactive entertainment.

Canada's video game industry is both a cultural and an economic success story. It contributes more than $5 billion annually to GDP and sustains over 34,000 high-quality jobs. It's also export-focused, with 88% of the games made in Canada sold internationally, bringing our amazing games to audiences around the world.

The global games industry's revenue is at $260 billion and climbing. While this creates opportunity, it also leads to significant competition between countries to attract the talent and investment required to build a successful games industry.

Beyond economics, this is an industry of imagination. Studios blend art, technology, design and storytelling to create immersive experiences that reflect Canadian innovation and diversity.

It's also a proudly Canadian sector. According to a StatsCan report in 2022, almost 98% of all the game companies in Canada were Canadian-owned. Global companies also choose to invest here, employing thousands of talented Canadians to make some of the most successful AAA titles available on the market.

Artificial intelligence has been part of the video game process for decades. Players might encounter it when a computer-controlled character reacts realistically, when a game world adapts to player behaviour and when moderation systems help keep online play safe and welcoming. Some game designers use AI to optimize performance, generate environments, detect bugs and translate dialogue. These tools assist developers by streamlining more redundant tasks, allowing game makers to focus on the more creative and expressive elements of game development.

It's these elements that differentiate good and great games in this highly competitive global market. Electronic Arts, which is known for its sports franchises, like NHL and EA Sports FC, which are developed in British Columbia—I know we have some B.C. members here today—is using an AI-powered technique called “swish” in some of its sports games. Swish predicts how the fabric in a jersey moves across a character's body, making uniforms and player motion appear more realistic while also increasing the speed and quality of the overall game.

Safety and trust teams can also employ AI to support human moderators to detect harassment, cheating or security breaches in real time. For example, Activision's Call of Duty now uses voice chat moderation systems that employ AI to detect and enforce rules against toxic speech.

Some studios have also begun experimenting with generative AI. These tools can be used to create text, sound and imagery based on human prompts. Writers might use generative AI to draft early ideas for non-player characters', or NPCs', dialogue or quest lines—content that can total hundreds of thousands of lines in a given game. Artists could use it to generate quick visual references for background textures, so they can focus on the distinctive, handcrafted art that defines a studio's style.

For example, Ubisoft, creator of the popular Assassin's Creed franchise, which is developed in Quebec, is experimenting with generative AI to improve these NPCs. Narrative directors can now build a character's personality, backstory and motivations as a model, resulting in more natural interactions with players.

In all these examples, the human creator remains central. Video games are driven by imagination and protected by strong intellectual property rights. For our sector, IP is not an abstract legal concept; it is the product itself. Our members invest deeply in creating new IP—original characters, stories, worlds and technologies that showcase Canadian creativity.

AI is just one of the many tools that are helping studios explore new ways to improve production and efficiency. The authorship and the quality of the storytelling are all driven by human creators. It is critical, however, that these creators can use cutting-edge technologies, including AI, that enable them to tell better stories.

Looking ahead, our goal is simple. We want to ensure that Canada remains the best place in the world to make games—where creativity, investment and innovation thrive under a stable IP framework. To remain a leader, we need to ensure that creators have access to the most advanced technologies, including AI, so they can compete on that global stage that I referenced earlier.

Thanks once again for inviting me. I'm happy to take questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you to everyone for your very succinct and well-put opening remarks.

We'll now start our first round of questions, starting with Mrs. Thomas for six minutes.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Chan, my first question is for you.

In your opening remarks, you said that AI serves as “innovation and empowerment in action”. In another post by you that I found, you said, “with [generative AI] pushing the technological needle further, I see every innovation as a tool to empower creators. I encourage artists to embrace the discomfort, learn new skills, and stay agile—you never know what fresh styles or breakthroughs you might uncover!”

I'm hoping that you can expand on this a bit with respect to the opportunity that exists with AI in terms of advancing the creative sector.

[Eric Chan]

One thing I've been sure of in my 15-plus-year career as a creator is that embracing the unknown is something everyone should be doing. Whether you're using data or code or you're learning a new skill, it doesn't even need to be AI. Get uncomfortable and you will realize the new serendipitous connections you make through your art with different stakeholders.

One thing I've noticed is that a lot of creators seem to want to be in their own silo or their own medium, but if you flip the script and look at the opposite end of the spectrum, I often find that's where the opportunity lies, especially when people disagree.

It has always been my mantra to explore something. If I'm feeling kind of uncertain and a bit jaded, I will ask, “Why am I feeling jaded?” Maybe I need to confront it and learn what it is about. Once I investigate and invest my time in it, I realize, “Whoa, I can actually do this, and it unlocks this. Wow.” Then my mind is racing, and I say, “I can combine these things to create something even more to amplify and scale my work.”

I just think allowing the unfamiliar and uncertain to be part of your creative process is what art is. Art is about democratizing your work, and not just with one particular medium. If you have the ability to expose as many people as possible to your work, I think that's part of embracing the unknown and really getting your work out there.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

In your opening remarks, you addressed copyright. That is a concern that's been expressed at this table by a number of witnesses who have come before us over the weeks. You made this statement, though: You said that AI is about “accessibility, not piracy”. It would seem that you're somewhat dismissive of concerns around copyright, so I'm just curious, again, about the opportunity that is there versus the risk that is there.

[Eric Chan]

To be honest, I think we don't even need to look at AI. AI has really opened up more of a lens on what happened before AI came about. As I mentioned, a lot of people use my work as reference and as mood boards. That's the way it's always existed. It's always been like that through the test of time. Every creator is referencing another person's masterwork, artwork or masterpiece. Through that, it informs the way they move in the trajectory of their art form.

For me, personally, if that's the case, I honestly have to continue to create more work. I've got to create new artwork. It empowers me to keep on pushing my artistic envelope, and that's the way the universe is.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I guess, then, as government considers where regulations should lie, there are two ends of the spectrum. One is to let it be a free-for-all and really not legislate at all, and then there's another side that would say a lot of legislation is needed in order to protect more traditional art forms and cultural forms.

What would you say to this committee about where a good place to rest would be in terms of legislating AI?

[Eric Chan]

To be quite frank, for me, I'm the creator; I create the art. That's a good question. I can only speak on my behalf as an individual as to what works for me and what I create. I hope that what I create is what I have to say and is my perspective of what I have.

I don't have all the answers to really help legislate it; I'm just showing my point of view as an artist in terms of what I've been using as innovation and creativity and what I reference from online to create my work. It's all part of the creative process.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Am I understanding you correctly that there could potentially be a lot of harm done to creativity and the advancement of the cultural sector if it was legislated to too much of an extent?

[Eric Chan]

Honestly, for me, personally, I allow the exploratory aspect to let the artists explore what works for them. If there is too much control, that could stifle the innovation envelope. That's where I am, so it's a fine line.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Mr. Al Soud, you have the floor now for six minutes.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's great to see you as always, and thank you to our witnesses for taking the time to be with us. It's, of course, truly appreciated.

Universal Music Group has now signed deals with AI developers like Udio and Stability AI. Merlin has signed with ElevenLabs to create “responsible guardrails that showcase how AI companies and music rightsholders can collaborate.”

Musixmatch has signed with Sony Music Publishing, Universal Music Publishing Group and Warner Chappell Music. It makes it the first company to partner with three top publishers. It's early now, but it's an indication of what we've been saying for quite some time at this committee, and what Mr. Bischoff was saying earlier. There's a balance to be struck.

Mr. Chan, your work at Library and Archives Canada as its first ever creator in residence explores how archival data can inspire new forms of generative art that connect past and future. I found this quote very interesting, “Data is my colour palette and paint is my keyboard.”

This committee has often touched on this intersection between computer code, data science and expression. I imagine your work is susceptible to criticism or at the very least to skepticism.

I'm curious: Could you offer some thoughts on that potentiality? I get the sense you hear that fairly often.

[Eric Chan]

Yes, this medium is still misunderstood. It's digital, so a lot of people would say, “This medium is associated with digital art as a technology: copy and paste, copy and paste. However, where's the originality of it? How do I know it's one of one? How do I know if it's a series?”

There's this misconception of what this medium is about, but if you look around at the new generation, everyone is using these tools to create a medium. They're using their tablets. They're using computers to create. However, it seems that we're in this sort of same cyclic nature. Where does it fall in the world of fine art or the institution?

In this case, using data from Library and Archives Canada to create new work is a big win. It's innovation. It's really bringing digital art to the forefront. I would like to think that we are pioneering something new nationally and that we could also bring this forward on the international stage.

Yes, I hope that what I can provide as an artist is to break these barriers and show, through my medium, what art can be in the digital era. We're in a digital age now. There are going to be more people. I'm not the only one. There are many more generative artists like me everywhere. This is why we need to have the discussion today, in order to really learn more about it.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

That's fantastic. Thank you for that.

Mr. Fogolin, I grew up on video games and sports. Those were the two things that were there for the entirety of my life. I'd like to thank you and the folks in your space for bringing them together.

You represent one of Canada's most globally competitive sectors. I was at your Video Games on the Hill reception not long ago, so I will take a moment to say it was awesome. During one of my conversations, it was noted that video game studios are adopting generative artificial intelligence more widely, primarily as a brainstorming and idea generation tool.

From your perspective, how do you view the intersection between AI and innovation, and how do you believe they complement one another?

[Paul Fogolin]

First of all, thanks for coming to our reception, and thanks to others who were able to come. I encourage everybody on this committee to try to come next year. It's a great time. Also, if we're playing games, it's important to note that a players study shows that the average age is around 36. You're never too old to play games. It's fun for everybody of all ages.

To your question, our members are telling us, as I said in my opening statement, that artificial intelligence.... I'm always clear to differentiate between general AI and generative AI. Generative AI, of course, is newer technology, generating text, images and content. It is being experimented on by the industry. As you mentioned—you probably heard during conversations—and as I said during my opening statement, it's predominantly showing value in freeing up artist creators by doing some of the most rote or mundane tasks. For those of you who play an open world game like Assassin's Creed, these are massive games. The worlds themselves are huge and often very historically accurate.

One thing we always love to tell is that, during the re-creation of Notre-Dame Cathedral, the Government of France came to Ubisoft to ask for their plans, because they had all of the details, up to every inch of the cathedral, and they helped in the re-creation. When you're designing a game like that with buildings, basic textures, bushes and trees, having something that can help create those quickly, allowing the creators to focus on the player characters, the immersive environments and the stuff that differentiates, is a valuable tool, and it's evolving.

It's similar, as I said, in some of the sports games. I gave the example of the Swiss technology for jerseys, but EA and others are also using it for things like stadium designs. Electronic Arts publishes college football. It's a very popular title, and they have a stadium that is an accurate representation of every single stadium in college football. You could image that it takes a long time to generate, so they're employing AI to help them get the basics. You're talking the tunnels, the overall field and the look of the stadium. Then they go in and they augment it to make sure it's specific to the teams, the pageantry and the design. It's proven a very helpful tool.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

The gaming sector often leads innovation in interactive storytelling. My next question is plain. Do you think that Canada's cultural funding policies reflect that leadership?

[Paul Fogolin]

That's a great question. I'll tell you this: Canada punches above its weight in the game-making space. It's something our members are proud of and that we're proud of as an association. The fact is that we have over 34,000 full-time jobs. These are high-paying jobs; the average salary is over $102,000 across the country. Yes, there are hubs like Montreal, Vancouver and Toronto, but now you're seeing it in all provinces across the country, in places such as in Edmonton, Halifax and Winnipeg.