Evidence of meeting #11 for Bill C-11 (41st Parliament, 1st Session) in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Robert DuPelle  Senior Policy Analyst, Copyright and International Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
Mike MacPherson  Procedural Clerk
Anne-Marie Monteith  Director, Copyright and International Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
Gerard Peets  Acting Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry
Drew Olsen  Director, Policy and Legislation, Copyright and International Trade Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage

9:58 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Thank you, Mr. DuPelle and Mr. Regan.

Do we have any further discussion?

9:58 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

If we're talking about the scope of the amendment, does that have an impact? I guess that comment is one I normally expect to hear from the legislative counsel. It's fine, I'm not objecting to the officials saying that. Is that....?

9:58 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

It's just the start of the House today, Mr. Regan.

9:58 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

The bells—I know.

9:58 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

It's the Pavlovian theory. I know we all start to salivate and want to get up and walk.

9:58 a.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

10 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

No, I wasn't asking about the bells. I wasn't asking about the dog. We're not going to hear from the legislative clerk on whether it's in the scope of this part of the bill.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Just give me one second.

We're not breaching any admissibility rules.

10 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let's move forward then.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Okay, Mr. Regan.

(Amendment negatived)

(Clause 38 agreed to on division)

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Mr. Del Mastro.

10 a.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would move that we consider and pass clauses 39 through 45 as a block.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Do I have the consent of the committee to move forward with that?

10 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Yes.

(Clauses 39 to 45 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 46)

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

We're now moving to clause 46. I know there is a government amendment, so I will look to Mr. Lake.

Will you be moving that amendment?

10 a.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

I will, as I have done in the past, go the officials for comment on how it affects the bill.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Mr. Olsen.

10 a.m.

Drew Olsen Director, Policy and Legislation, Copyright and International Trade Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage

Thank you.

Statutory damages enable courts to award damages to copyright owners in a pre-established range without showing proof of actual damages. Under Bill C-11, copyright owners would be able to seek injunctions, profits, and/or actual damages against enablers, but the option of seeking statutory damages is not available to them.

It has been suggested that statutory damages should be available against enablers. The proposed amendment would make statutory damages available against those who enable copyright infringement.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Thank you, Mr. Olsen.

It's back to you, Mr. Lake.

10 a.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

I'm happy with that explanation.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

Thank you, Mr. Lake.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

(Clause 46 as amended agreed to on division)

(On clause 47)

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

We're now moving to clause 47.

Mr. Angus.

10 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

We have a number of amendments to move.

10 a.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault

I believe the first one you're moving, Mr. Angus, is amendment NDP-14.

10 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We've been attempting to work with the government to fix the fundamental flaws of this bill, but we've seen no willingness on their part to address the two great downfalls of this bill. The first is the attack on the royalties and the attack on the creative community that we see throughout this bill. The second is the attack on the rights of average citizens to actually participate in the digital age without worry that they may perhaps be seen as criminalized.

This is on the digital locks provision, because under this bill the digital locks provision allows the corporate interest to override any of the rights that are guaranteed to an ordinary citizen. We're not talking about people who are breaking TPMs, technical protection measures, in order to steal content. We're not talking about undermining legitimate business models. What we're talking about is the ability of a citizen to extract through a TPM work for which they have a legal right to do so. The Conservative position is if you don't like it, don't buy the product. It's not the basis of the rule of law that a corporate algorithm decides if your right is accessible or not.

We had a very good example the other day from the archivist who said if a historic film is on a DVD and they don't know the owner of it, they're not allowed to extract that work because they're technically breaking a digital lock and therefore they're engaged in criminal behaviour. That seems to me a far cry from the legitimate need to ensure that, for example, the gaming industry is protected in terms of its right to make sure that its product isn't being stolen. We're talking about the legitimate legal rights of Canadians here.

Now, the bill does allow exemptions for network research, the interoperability of computer programs for policing and intelligence operations. But we would say the reasonable question is why don't we link the prohibition of breaking digital locks to actual acts of infringement, rather than presuming the criminality of every Canadian who engages in the digital realm?

Our amendment is as simple as it is important. In the first half it's a linking of the criminal penalties for violation of digital locks to copyright infringement, and (a) refers to the access to a work, while (b) refers to the use of the work. This is a crucial reform that has been endorsed by virtually every consumer advocacy group in this country, including several witnesses we've heard from, like the Canadian Consumer Initiative. They have talked about the need to clarify the difference between breaking locks for criminal purposes and for infringement purposes, and the ability to break a lock because you were extracting content for use in research, or for example in the creative community for documentary work.

We've heard from entrepreneurs who fear that a regressive digital locks regime will directly threaten innovation and significantly hamper Canada's ability to compete, and from creator groups warning that flawed lock rules may be as big a threat to their livelihoods as piracy itself. We've learned of the disastrous impact of such imbalanced measures that they've had in the United States. We actually see, even under the deeply flawed American DMCA legislation, they recognize the need that DMCA is not to override certain basic constitutional rights that citizens have in order to extract works.

We therefore say with our colleagues that we can amend this. We can be WIPO-compliant. We can ensure that we are protecting the new business models that are emerging and that rely on TPMs, while not unnecessarily interfering with the legal rights of Canadians and not leaving Canadians exposed as potential criminals through these onerous digital lock provisions.