Good afternoon.
Before I begin, I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to be here today and the government for including photographers in Bill C-11. That is a very important move, and we are grateful.
I notice that we are in an ideal room, since, right in front of me, I can see the following sentence:
“The spirit of the printed word”, and to show the spirit of the printed word there's an image. I guess an image is worth a thousand words.
In addition to awarding first ownership in copyright to the creators of photographs, Bill C-11 also proposes a new provision, section 32.2(1)(f), which provides individuals who commission photographs, for private or non-commercial uses, broad rights to reproduce these photographs.
We support allowing the commissioner and their family reasonable usage of photographs commissioned for private purposes, particularly in social media.
However, we are very concerned that Bill C-11 does not define non-commercial purposes. We believe this omission will significantly harm small business photographers' ability to earn a living and generate economic growth.
Without defining non-commercial purposes, it allows some unintended reproduction of commissioned photographs that could have financial implications for photographers. This fundamentally alters what should be a balanced approach between the rights of users and the rights of photographers to earn a living. The heart of this imbalance is that users may choose to reproduce the commissioned photographs for purposes that to the user are non-commercial but that have significant commercial implications for the photographer. In these cases, the term "non-commercial" has very different meanings to the artist and the commissioner.
Let's give you an example.
Look at the back cover of your brochure for a second. A photographer is commissioned to photograph a landscape of Port aux Basques in Newfoundland. Under the bill, the commissioner is permitted to reproduce this photograph for private and non-commercial purposes. Mailing a copy to his son, hanging a copy on his cottage wall, or giving a copy to his grandmother who grew up in Port aux Basques—these activities would not have a substantial financial impact on the photographer.
However, if that photograph were to be reproduced several hundred times, it would have serious commercial consequences for the photographer, even though it might be a non-commercial practice for the commissioner. It would affect the photographer's future earnings, because he would not be able to sell similar photographs of the same landscape. All the photographer's potential customers would already have a free copy of the photograph.
To correct this imbalance and in order to clarify what is meant by non-commercial, we have presented a small, technical amendment that reflects the spirit of Bill C-11. In fact, it is drawn from clause 29.21(1) of the bill, called “Non-commercial User-generated Content”, which Bill C-11 seeks to add to the legislation. The wording of our amendment is on page 2 of the backgrounder that you have before you.
This amendment allows for the broad use of commissioned photographs. It also limits only those uses that would have a substantial financial impact on photographers. It sets parameters to ensure non-commercial practices, as perceived by the commissioner, do not have substantial commercial implications on photographers.
However, this amendment supports the desire of the government and consumers to have fair access to their commissioned photographs. We do not believe our amendment alters the intent of the provision; it simply helps provide some clarity to non-commercial uses.
Mr. Boyle.