Bill C-11 committee  This amendment would ensure that there is no overlap in terms of rights provided in relation to members of the Rome Convention treaty and the WPPT treaty.

Bill C-11 committee  I'm not sure we're speaking about the same—

Bill C-11 committee  This amendment would amend the new liability provision in relation to enablers of copyright infringement. It would amend the current wording so that it removes the terminology around “designed” and would focus on providing a service primarily for the purposes of enabling acts of

Bill C-11 committee  There have been concerns raised in relation to the use of the term “designed”. In order to ensure that there are no misinterpretations of what the policy intent was in relation to use of the term “designed”, alternate wording is being used that focuses on the providing of this se

Bill C-11 committee  The way the provision is intended to function is that there would be an intent, in relation to providing the service. That the provision of that service would be primarily for the purpose of enabling acts of infringement.

Bill C-11 committee  I think, as well, that it's important to keep in mind—as you can see in the factors listed under proposed subsection 2.4 in the same provision—that there is a need, as well, to ensure that entities not targeted by the provision are not caught by the provision. I think that's prob

Bill C-11 committee  It shouldn't be too long.

Bill C-11 committee  The removal of the “knows or should have known” does clarify in terms of the knowledge element. The knowledge element, in a sense, is incorporated into the notion of the person providing the service primarily for that purpose, rather than having “knows or should have known” expre

Bill C-11 committee  In terms of the scope of the private purposes, it would be the individual's private purposes, the intent being that within the private sphere of that individual, that individual could use the recorded program. If there were other people within that sphere, they would be able to e

Bill C-11 committee  In terms of making clarifications with respect to program, the way the provision operates and the intent of the provision is not necessarily to be limited to a specific program. It could include works within the program. I expect these changes would modify that in terms of chang

Bill C-11 committee  The use of the term “program” in the provision is intended to be flexible. It's not defined, and to provide a definition could alter the meaning, or it could at least define those parameters, thereby changing the nature of the provision. In that sense, it would be a question of

Bill C-11 committee  There's nothing specific in the bill that would suggest there's a double payment. It would depend on the facts of a given case. To the extent that an entity providing a service is able to benefit from the hosting safe harbour under clause 35, which would be amended by Liberal 1

Bill C-11 committee  This is a series of technical amendments that amend clause 35, which provides safe harbour provisions for Internet service providers. Specifically, there are three safe harbour provisions: for mere conduit services; for caching services, which is copying done for network efficie

Bill C-11 committee  Clause 18, specifically proposed new subsection 27(2.1), would provide for greater certainty that a copy made outside Canada does not infringe copyright in terms of secondary infringement “if, had it been made in Canada, it would have been made under a limitation or exception” in

Bill C-11 committee  With respect to digital locks that are applied to material, there is a specific carve-out in relation to persons with perceptual disabilities. I believe it's under section 41.16, under clause 47 of the bill.