Industry committee  I think you might be talking about Re:Sound, which we don't utilize.

Industry committee  I'll go. That surprises me. I'm not sure I understand that data point. Did you say it's 11 times lower than the equivalent rate in the U.S.?

Industry committee  It's the same with Spotify.

Industry committee  What territory is this in?

Industry committee  Well, first of all, I wasn't aware that it went up two dollars. You just told me something I didn't know. When prices go up, as they do in various territories around the world at various times due to inflation and other reasons, that revenue is accounted for in our licence agreements as part of the revenue pool.

Industry committee  I wasn't at Spotify then, but I do know anecdotally that the licensing landscape in Canada was difficult at the time, particularly—

Industry committee  —on the music publishing side of things. I think I talked in my opening statement about the issue of fragmentation of rights. On the mechanical rights side in particular, it's difficult in Canada to get a full coverage of rights when you're licensing from an entity like CSI which, I think practically speaking, only controls perhaps 70% or 80% of the market.

Industry committee  I will, absolutely.

Industry committee  To start with, I want to apologize if you did not get a response to this question after our first committee hearing. We sent a letter to the committee. I don't know if you saw it. We sent a detailed response to this question, among others. I don't have that response handy, that letter, but we do have that—

Industry committee  —so now, I'm sorry to say, I need to operate on some memory about what was said—

Industry committee  I want to stress that I don't know the mechanics, unfortunately, of how radio airplay gets paid in Canada. All I know is how Spotify pays. Also, I should say that we don't typically have relationships directly.... I know this is frustrating to hear. I don't know what happens in the value chain from when we pay the rights holder, the copyright owner—in this case, it might have been a record label or some other entity—and they then pay the artist.

Industry committee  Without talking about Drake in particular, I think it's fair to say that if lots more people are listening to some piece of music versus another, the first one would make more money. That's correct.

Industry committee  I think there's a misunderstanding here in the idea that we have a per-stream royalty at all. For the most part, that's not true. We have hundreds of licence agreements. I have to generalize somewhat because they're all somewhat different, but there are certain commonalities in that for the most part, we're talking about revenue-sharing agreements that don't typically include per-stream rates.

Industry committee  Could you restate the question a little bit? I'm not sure I follow the if and then.

Industry committee  It is possible that what you're talking about would result in greater cost to consumers. We don't tend to look at it that way. The way we look at it is that despite having 87 million paying subscribers on the service today, we're in the very beginning of what's happening. More money coming into the revenue share pool, as I call it, means more subscribers to the service.