Industry committee  It has changed pretty significantly. It went from 5% being downloaded in 2009 to 20% this year—and to 50% by 2013 is what we project. So it's pretty significant.

Industry committee  It depends a lot on the specific platform. In fact, this is one of the fantastic things that we've seen developing. We've seen a proliferation of these platforms, such as the App World for RIM, the App Store for Apple, and the Android marketplace for Android-based devices, all of which are subject to their own philosophies and each of which has benefits and drawbacks.

Industry committee  Yes. It is important to note that the way these sites essentially operate is by word of mouth very quickly and by reporting. What drives the sales of apps is the fact that people will comment on the apps and rate them. We call “vapourware” any app that's been produced and is out there but doesn't mean anything and doesn't work.

Industry committee  Thank you very much. The Entertainment Software Association of Canada represents the Canadian video game industry. Something that some people don't know is that Canada is actually a global powerhouse in video game development. We're ranked third in the world in video game production.

Industry committee  It is absolutely critical. For us, speaking on behalf of the games industry, it is our number one priority above all things. This is probably because Canada has been lagging behind. As I said, we are 15 years behind now with the WIPO Internet treaties. It is critical we move forward, primarily because we can see that the e-commerce marketplace is developing so rapidly.

Industry committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. For those of you who aren't familiar with us, the Entertainment Software Association of Canada is the association that represents companies in Canada that develop, publish, and distribute games for all sorts of platforms—from consoles to computers to the Internet to mobile devices to handheld devices.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Essentially, not necessarily--for a number of reasons, most of which are technical. One is that the UGC exemption in the bill, unlike some of the other exemptions, actually does continue to apply even if a TPM is circumvented in order to create the UGC. So that doesn't disallow it.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Certainly. Essentially, the challenge with this new kind of two-tiered system of statutory damages is that for the non-commercial tier it sets a new range between $100 and $5,000, but unlike the current regime, it actually is not on a per infringement basis. It will apply to all infringements that people have ever engaged in from the entire history of their life from the day the legal proceedings are filed.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Absolutely. In fact, there was one gentleman at the copyright consultation who we called Mr. “Six-Terabyte” because he was basically professing that he had a six-terabyte server offering up Canadian content and making Canadian content known the world over even if no one was getting paid for it.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  This is actually good; it highlights the tension, because this is the exact concern that we have. The proposal to link circumvention and infringement means that the example that I provided means we would never be able to pursue that. What we're going to find is those who are offering circumvention devices and services, at least the smart ones, are going to quickly distance themselves from any act of infringement.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The issue, again, is I think you need to look at the entire range of exceptions that are available under the act. So the issue is not just a fair dealing; is there any kind of non-infringing use that they can claim to fall under? That's what they would be pushing for.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think “transformative” would be one element of several elements you would need to incorporate in there. I certainly think the suggestion to incorporate elements like Berne is exactly the direction we're proposing. The specific concern I would have about the Berne language is that Berne is about determining when an exception is appropriate or not, and it would be conflating two very different regimes to incorporate that specific language.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  But I am essentially proposing those elements, because, first, I'm proposing that it doesn't affect the work prejudicially and I'm proposing that you incorporate fair-dealing style limitations, which is our interpretation of what Berne is. And I'm proposing this transformative element, because it's actually an element that's been included in other jurisdictions but that we haven't included, but which is very sensible to incorporate into a UGC provision—because, again, I think the real value of it is that you're creating something new that you're distributing to the world.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The trick is that balance, and it's very challenging to achieve. From our point of view we have a principal, overriding concern, which is to ensure that those who are trafficking in circumvention devices, offering circumvention services, particularly charging money for it and in doing so making money on the backs of creators, are not able to do that.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Obviously, eliminating the provision entirely would resolve the issue; we were attempting to operate within the policy framework outlined with this bill and understand the clear desire or intention to facilitate at least some kind of limited personal use creation working within that framework.