Bill C-11 Committee on March 13th, 2012

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Monsieur Dionne Labelle.

[Pierre Dionne Labelle, NDP, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

This one? No, we just talked about that. It's not that one, it's the other one.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I'll begin.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Mr. Angus, we'll go back to you.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

This goes back to our earlier concern about the roadblock this government is putting up in the face of people with perceptual disabilities. Not only do they face numerous obstacles in being able to access works, but now they're having to become computer software geniuses. In fact, if they extract a work so they can actually make use of it, they have to go and then repair the lock. It's kind of a bizarre concept. We're talking about a computer algorithm. I think the Conservatives actually thought they were digital locks, so if you had a lock, once you picked the lock, you could fix the lock. It's like once you unlock a house, someone can go in, and then you should be able to lock it again.

But we're talking about computer software and computer code here, so just for the folks back home, our Conservative colleagues think that blind people or people with hearing disabilities who have to extract a work may be engaged in all kinds of nefarious activities if they don't repair the lock after they've come into the cultural house. It seems to be a bizarre thing.

Our provision is the issue of repairing the TPM if it's been extracted for a legal purpose with a person with perceptual disabilities...just leave it alone. Why are you putting more pressure on people who are already facing numerous incapacities, inabilities to participate in culture? So this provision on having to be responsible for the lock and the state of the lock I find makes absolutely no sense, and it doesn't even respond to the real world.

Mr. Dionne Labelle, did you want to say anything, or are we content with this?

[Pierre Dionne Labelle, NDP, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Yes, absolutely. To me, this requirement is not in line with the reality. On the one hand, you are granting a right, but on the other hand, you are limiting that right with a provision that needlessly complicates matters for those with perceptual disabilities by making them repair digital locks. You have two opposing sides of the same coin: one side seeks to make things easier, while the other seeks to complicate them. So our amendment is entirely relevant.

That being said, given that not a single amendment intended to make life easier for these people has been accepted, I don't expect much of you, gentlemen.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Monsieur Dionne Labelle.

Before we move to further discussion, I just need to notify you that Liberal amendment 14 is identical to NDP amendment 17, the one that was just moved, so we will only be proceeding with NDP amendment 17.

With that being said, is there any further discussion on amendment NDP-17?

Go ahead, Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Again, Mr. Angus has a tendency to go way over the top with his comments, believe it or not. He talks about this law throwing roadblocks in the way of people with perceptual disabilities. I'm going to go to the officials, if I could again, to just speak in generalities to what this new bill does for people with perceptual disabilities, and the accommodations made for these people in the new bill.

[Robert DuPelle]

As we've seen in some of the previous clauses, there is an expansion in relation to the existing exceptions to copyright infringement for persons with perceptual disabilities in terms of who can benefit from the exception. There is a new provision in the bill with respect to the exportation of adapted materials to other countries for persons with perceptual disabilities. As we see now with this clause, there is a carve-out from the prohibitions in relation to circumventing technological protection measures for the benefit of persons with perceptual disabilities.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Mr. DuPelle.

Mr. Lake, is there anything further?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

No.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Mr. Angus, you mentioned that you would like to speak.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Certainly.

With all due respect, Mr. DuPelle, I think that answer was lousy. I don't think you answered the question at all.

What we're talking about is an amendment that takes out the words “to the extent that the services, technology, device, or component do not unduly impair the technological protection measure”. Are you suggesting that blind people are going to take a hammer to the CD? How is it possible that taking that language out is going to interfere? It seems that “unduly impair”, that language.... Is the expectation that people with perceptual disabilities are hackers or something? How would taking those three lines out possibly damage a business model? You are putting the onus on them. You are putting roadblocks in the path of people with perceptual disabilities. That's what you are doing.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Would you like to answer, Mr. DuPelle?

[Robert DuPelle]

With respect, I don't think there was a question for officials to answer.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Well, do you want me to be clearer? Why did you put in that language that they have to be responsible for fixing something and that they can't unduly impair the technological protection measure? We're talking about people with perceptual disabilities. Why is that language in there if you're not looking to put a roadblock in front of them?

[Gerard Peets]

That is essentially a policy question that would be more appropriate for the government to answer.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Mr. Peets.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I don't think that's appropriate at all. They've been using you guys as flacks to cover off everything. You told us about the carve-out--

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

--but you're not telling us about this provision.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Mr. Angus, please.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

This provision is what I'm asking you about.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Mr. Angus, please use appropriate language. Let's be a little bit more respectful. You can disagree, but I would ask you to watch your language.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I certainly agree. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess what I find frustrating--