Evidence of meeting #6 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 music.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Tyrone Benskin NDP Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
I understand that. All I'm trying to get is confirmation that the right music and the right musical choices are a component of that success.
Vice-President and General Manager, CTV2 and Radio Ottawa, CHUM Radio
They are a component of that success.
NDP
Tyrone Benskin NDP Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you.
I want to move on to Mr. McCarty.
We've heard talk of iPod taxes, and so forth. The physical element of any MP3 player is a series of inventions, creations that are put together and patented by either individuals or companies, that are put together to make this unit work. Right?
NDP
Tyrone Benskin NDP Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
True.
So why is it, do you think, that people would be bothered by paying for the content that goes onto it, if they're already paying for the rights of all the components that make up the unit?
President, ole
Intellectual property is an odd thing in the first place. It's invisible to most people as they go throughout their daily lives. When it gets brought up to them, it's a unique concept to them and they usually don't like the idea of paying for it. If you knew that $5 of your iPhone went to a certain patent embedded in the iPhone, you probably would resent it. So just because it's being brought up here today, that's why people resent it.
The reason the iPhone will pay for the patent is because the law says they have to. The reason they won't give the music industy any part of their economic value chain is because the law says they don't have to.
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
Thank you very much, Mr. Benskin and Mr. McCarty.
Now we're moving to Mr. Lake, for five minutes.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I have to go quickly here, so it's a quick question for Ms. Woods and Mr. Gray.
You paid $64 million in 2011 for the broadcast right and $21 million for the ephemeral right, basically. That totals about $85 million. Before the $21 million, before there was any fee paid there, what were you paying for broadcast?
Counsel, Regulatory Law, Bell, CHUM Radio
It would have been the right relating to the performance.
Conservative
Counsel, Regulatory Law, Bell, CHUM Radio
I'm sorry, I don't know it off the top of my head. But I can get back to you on that.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
It would have been less than $64 million, would it?
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Okay. I suspect that to be the case. I believe it's probably in the neighbourhood of $60 million, if I'm accurate, which would mean that the $21 million over the last five years is just simply completely on top of that.
To Mr. Cash's point, he made a good point. He said why don't you just pay it? It's not that much, why don't you just pay it?
Mr. Cash, for you $100 isn't too much, so why don't you just give me $100--no reason, but why don't you just give me $100, because it's not much for you?
NDP
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I'm good now.
It seems to me that this broadcast mechanical right is a phantom right, Mr. McCarty. Here's what I mean by that. It's paid not for the value actually provided by a musical--
Conservative
NDP
