Evidence of meeting #4 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 radio.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Dean, Algonquin College, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
We've moved completely online.
11:45 a.m.
Dean, Algonquin College, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
We have a learning management system called Blackboard. We are moving to a mobile environment for all of our students. Students will bring the device of their choice—they are already doing that—and interface with the college and our systems to gain access to their material that way. Everything we do for one semester that is going to be reused next semester is stored. We want to be able to continue to port that forward in the following term. It's not economically reasonable to assume that we would dispose of all of this and recreate from scratch. It's just not reasonable or economically feasible.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
We've been focusing on distance education as it pertains to this 30-day clause here. In fact, all students are completely wired right now. One of my kids is in second year at Ryerson. He's not in distance education, but all of his notes are online. He downloads those notes; he downloads the resources. He has also paid the tuition. He's buying textbooks as well.
11:50 a.m.
Dean, Algonquin College, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
That's right.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
It strikes us as counterproductive for learning that he wouldn't be able to refer to those resources down the road.
11:50 a.m.
Dean, Algonquin College, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
That's correct. That's why we oppose that particular part of the bill.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
I'm just wondering as well about this. We've been talking a bit about the Berne three-step and the six steps for fair dealing that the Supreme Court has defined. Would it, in your view, be helpful to have that Supreme Court definition clearly mapped out in Bill C-11?
11:50 a.m.
Director, Government Relations and Policy Research, Public Affairs, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
I'll respond to that. I don't have any legal background, so I'd certainly like to take that back to our organization and confer. I certainly can get a response back to you in about a week on what position we would have on that.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
Great. Thank you for your answer.
Thank you as well to Mr. Cash.
We're now in the home stretch.
Mr. Lake.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Again, thank you to the witnesses for coming today.
I just want to clarify a few things.
First of all, on Mr. Cash's comments, there's nothing in the legislation that requires deletion of courses, teachers' notes, or the preparation materials they do to get ready for class. There's no reference to destruction of notes, per se, that a student might make, or whatever the case might be.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
We have to be clear here: it's in the bill. It says they will destroy any of those notes 30 days after—
11:50 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
The point of order has to relate to a Standing Order that's being breached.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
But it's just so that people back home don't misinterpret this.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
On the point of order, so that my time is not being eaten up with this, I will point out that it clearly doesn't read “notes”; it reads “destroy any fixation of the lesson within 30 days”, and it defines “lesson” at the beginning of the section we're talking about. It clearly does not refer to notes.
If you're going to raise a point of order that isn't a point of order, at least get the facts correct.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
Gentlemen, this is done now, so let's move on. We'll start the time again for Mr. Lake and will go forward from there.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
To look at the proposed section that's being referred to, what it says at the beginning is that:
For the purposes of this section, “lesson” means a lesson, test or examination, or part of one, in which, or during the course of which, an act is done in respect of a work or other subject-matter by an educational institution or a person acting under its authority
—and here is the key wording—
that would otherwise be an infringement of copyright but is permitted under a limitation or exception under this Act.
Just to be clear, what we're talking about here is the allowance of an opportunity to do something that you otherwise wouldn't be able to do. Everything else in terms of the way teaching is done is still allowed in the way that it always has been. Teachers will prepare their notes. My wife is a teacher. She'll still be able to prepare lesson plans and keep those lesson plans and use them in the future. What it allows is a situation wherein.... I'll use an example.
I don't know where Andrew Cash went to school, but he is a performer. If he decided that he wanted to, and one of the teachers invited him back to perform for a class—perhaps an arts class, or something like that—he could go back and perform. In our previous world, where there weren't distance learning opportunities, he would perform, everyone would watch that, it would be part of the lesson, they would learn something and maybe take notes on it—whatever the case—and everything would be okay. What is not allowed, and has never been allowed, is for a student to tape that performance and keep that performance forever, unless Mr. Cash gives permission to do so.
That's what this is trying to address. What it's saying is that it's necessary to make a copy of this performance, or a “fixation” as the rules call it, so that a student in Nunavut could actually see that performance and take part in the class and be able to benefit from seeing Mr. Cash perform and perhaps hear him talk about his experience. But it doesn't allow them to keep a copy forever of Mr. Cash's performance, unless, of course, Mr. Cash decides that he wants to allow that, in which case, according to the first paragraph here, it wouldn't be an infringement of copyright anymore, because Mr. Cash would have given people the right to do it.
That's an important clarification. I don't know whether you have any comment on that, but I think the focus needs to be on this as an opportunity that otherwise doesn't exist. And it takes nothing away from teachers' or professors' ability to teach the way they always have or prepare the way they always have, or from students' ability to take notes on those things and keep them forever.
11:55 a.m.
Director, Government Relations and Policy Research, Public Affairs, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
I would agree with your term “opportunity”.
11:55 a.m.
Policy Analyst, Ontario Public School Boards Association, Canadian School Boards Association
I think the scenario you just proposed is reasonable. It's not the advice I was given by legal counsel when preparing my response to this bill, so I'd like to have an opportunity to talk to her about this again and just make sure that the information we're dealing with is agreed upon on both sides. Then maybe I can respond in writing with a more definitive answer on this, so that I'm not misrepresenting.
What you outlined there is very different from the way I was instructed the law would be interpreted. I just want to make sure that I'm not misrepresenting anyone.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
To be fair, this is one example. I think what you're saying is reasonable and I appreciate that.
I guess I'll just ask one follow-up question on it to Mr. Brulé or Ms. Clarke—or Ms. Andrew, if she wants to answer.
Does it seem reasonable, in your opinion, that a student at a distance or within that class should be able to keep a copy of Mr. Cash's performance or lecture, whatever it might be, forever, without having permission from Mr. Cash to do so?
11:55 a.m.
Policy Analyst, Ontario Public School Boards Association, Canadian School Boards Association
It was never the intention of the Canadian School Boards Association to allow students to keep and to continue to use copyrighted materials that were provided to them for the sole purpose of their instruction.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Dean, Algonquin College, Association of Canadian Community Colleges
I guess my only comment would be that with the introduction of education under fair dealing, there needs to be a reconciliation of this clause with the need to have a balance between fair dealing and the ability to pass on to students extracts of copyrighted material without infringing the law. So again, there's a balance: here you're saying, on one hand, “destroy all those things after 30 days”; on the other hand, we're saying that fair dealing in the context of the classroom allows us certain exemptions.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Again, though, the law is pretty clear when it talks about what has to be destroyed. It's talking about something that would otherwise be an infringement of copyright but is permitted under a limitation or exception of the act. It's very clear on that, and I think this needs to be clear, because there's all sorts of talk of destroying notes or destroying lesson plans. That is absolutely not the case. It's crystal clear in the bill as presented.