Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to all of you for being here. I would like to specify that it is indeed the work of the Copyright Board to regulate all of this and that in this bill, the 30-day exemption is unfortunately a loophole that allows for a constant renewal of those 30 days. Therein lies the problem.
If we could at least limit the number of repetitions of that copy, this loophole that is cheerfully proposed to broadcasters so that they can avoid the Copyright Board would be abolished.
We have to stop going around in circles. This is an issue that falls under the purview of the Copyright Board, end of story. If we want to avoid any problem, we have only to ensure that there will be no renewal of this grace period of 30 days. It isn't complicated.
A little earlier, I heard people talking about ephemeral copies, mechanical rights, of course, but also about levies. I also heard the words ''format shifting''. In reading your document, I can see that there is a serious problem related to backup copies and personal copies in sections 29.2 and 29.4 of the act.
Don't you find it unfortunate that the words ''format shifting'' do not appear in the act? Would the use of those words not be preferable to the prevailing vagueness that allows people to make copies for themselves, for some use or other?