Thank you.
We feel that once again the government is overreaching, and that will probably impact the ability of libraries, and the transfer of information and education to develop. We are concerned about the five-day limit provision because it doesn't exist in the analog world.
Let's say I send away to a small library in Red Deer, and ask for someone's memoirs that are on file so I can research them. They make me a copy and send it to me in an analog paper form. I have it for 30 or 40 days to do the work. But if they send me a digital copy, I only have it for five days. I think that's unnecessary and impractical, especially for so many people who are doing their own research now in the areas of law and medicine. If they are getting documents and have only five days to use them, it's pretty much useless.
We're also concerned about the vagueness of the phrase “take measures”, because it could put restrictions on smaller libraries. Every library has a collection of some sort, but not every library has the ability to impose the “take measures” by putting on a technological protection measure to ensure the five days will be met. If there's a technological protection measure, it will just make whatever is transmitted go “poof” after five days. It makes it very difficult to transfer this information without extra added responsibility and potential liability on those who are making the PDF, as opposed to a paper copy.
We believe the issue should be to at least clarify it, and to send a notification that you're not allowed to make extra copies. You're not allowed to make use of the work that is being transmitted, except for the personal study of the person who requested it. This is simply more reasonable and will allow libraries and education to carry on the great work they're doing.
I'll pass it on to Monsieur Nantel.