Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) Committee on Feb. 8th, 2011

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

So with the many issues you've identified with the bill, if there were a willingness to address this direct loss of revenue, would you be willing to go along with the rest of the bill? Would the rest of the bill be sufficient if we could address the issues of artists' royalties that are being seemingly stripped away and deliberately targeted by this bill?

[Ferne Downey]

Well, that's a very intriguing question. I think there are sufficient flaws embedded throughout all of Bill C-32 that you'd have to have a more holistic approach to fix it all. It's not as if the creators' rights and artists' rights are in just some few aspects of the bill; they are embedded in every part of the bill.

I'm going to ask Stephen to comment.

[Stephen Waddell]

A lot of oxen are being gored in this bill. A lot of money is being taken out of the pockets of creators--$126 million annually is what we estimate. And that cuts across the folks we represent, the royalty artists of Canada, but also educators, writers, and of course publishers and songwriters. It cuts right across the spectrum in terms of creators, and everybody is going to be hurt by this bill, unfortunately.

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

Again, on the private copying levy, when it was adjudicated at the Copyright Board they were very specific about what the fees would be and what would be allowed. Given what you've heard from the Conservatives in their media attack on the levy, does that reflect in any way the reality of the levy system that has been in place and what will continue to be?

[Stephen Waddell]

I've heard the attack ads and the talk about the $75 iPod tax. As we know, it's not a tax. As we've said, the only tax is the HST on iPods. This is a levy. The idea is that the user who buys the iPod--I have one--should make a contribution to the artists whose work they're going to copy. It's a really simple principle, and it's one that's been in place in Europe, South America, and elsewhere around the world for years.

This is not a tax. It's not taking money from taxpayers; it's taking it from the people who actually buy the product that makes the copies, right? It just makes sense. I don't understand why, coming out of the gate, the Conservatives took the position that this is a tax and it's $75. It's not $75. Currently it's $2 to $25. So I don't get why they're doing this.

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

I'm interested in the issue of knock-off films. You were talking about the loss of jobs. It seems to me you can break it down.... There are bootleg movies, the knock-offs that are sold in corner stores, and there seems to be no interest by any police to actually deal with those. They're all over the world. You can go to anyplace and they're selling knock-offs. So there's clearly a commercial infringement there that should be dealt with.

There are uploaded clips, mostly television shows, by fans. We've seen in the United States the huge statutory damages against individuals. Certainly, in the New Democratic Party we are very wary about.... Frankly, we think Sony and Universal and gang have poisoned the waters for us on this, because we don't want to see individuals.... But we are concerned about the knock-offs.

Then there's the third element, which is the films that are robbing studios of that precious opening-time release because they're getting bootleg copies out before the legitimate copies. Two years ago we had the camcorder issue. Last week I had someone give me a blockbuster film to watch that was not out on DVD. They said they thought I should see it, because it was excellent quality, and it said very clearly on the watermark to not distribute the film because it was for the promotional awards.

So within the industry itself it seems there is a pretty lackadaisical attitude on knock-offs, if I can watch a film in Ottawa or Toronto that originated in Hollywood and that was meant to be seen strictly as a promotion in set-up for one of the major awards ceremonies.

Within the industry itself, is there talk about educating the industry as much as we're talking about educating consumers? It seems pretty outrageous that the films that are being shown are coming directly out of Hollywood.

[John Lewis]

We're an international organization and we're very much involved in the efforts taking place in the United States addressing these issues. I think it's not fair to list one example—maybe for the Oscars or something—where a promotional video gets sent out. The industry has spent literally millions of dollars to educate, to enforce, and to try to bring about real change.

I think we can do things. We can change behaviour. You referred to the Criminal Code amendments that took place. Canada was one of the leading sources of illegal camcording of videos prior to the enactment of the amendments to the Criminal Code. Since that time, we have fallen off the radar—good thing—in terms of being a source for illegally camcorded motion pictures. It shows that if we do something right, if this committee does something right, we can change behaviour.

I hear people say this issue has gotten too big. No matter what you do, it's insurmountable. I disagree. We can change behaviour. It's about education. It's about letting people know there's a strong deterrent.

Madame Lavallée asked a number of questions about statutory damages. We think you should extend those damages to enablers, the hosting sites. That's really where a lot of the problem is happening.

I'll say it, because I think my friends are afraid to: sure, you should send them to jail. I don't think that's going to happen with this committee, but why not? They're stealing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gord Brown]

Thank you.

We're going to have to move along to Mr. Del Mastro for seven minutes.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate the testimony.

I think Canadians are inherently fair. I think that if laws are established, Canadians don't steal. Canadians don't generally break the law—most Canadians abide by the law, especially when they understand it and it's outlined properly and they understand what the rules are in a marketplace.

But I'll also say that Canadians right now are about fed up with being nickel-and-dimed. In fact, they're really fed up with it. We saw a great example last week on the UBB ruling with the CRTC. I'd be surprised if there's a single member of this committee who didn't receive dozens, if not hundreds, or perhaps more e-mails on that decision saying stop nickel-and-diming me. Stop it; I've had it. Canadians are at a level of frustration.

Ms. Downey, you gave a great performance in your presentation.

I'd really like to know...you indicated that the private copying levy, something we've call an iPod tax, won't apply to cars. In fact, you may have listed a few things it won't apply to, despite the fact that my wife's newish vehicle, I believe, has a 30-gigabyte hard drive in it, but it might have a 60-gigabyte hard drive built right into it that's specifically for the storage of music. I'd be very interested in learning from you which devices you do suggest it would apply to.

[Ferne Downey]

As the CPCC, the Canadian Private Copying Collective, presented to you last week or the week before, maybe even last month, when they brought their paper forward, the intent is solely digital audio recorders. We're going baby steps, incrementally, as all we have currently are recordable blank CDs, digital audio recorders, created solely for the purpose, nor has the CPCC requested the--

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

But they're already an antiquated technology, right? People are now using devices that are multi-platform. If all you want to go after is an MP3 player, that's 2002. Is that really the bar you want to set, or is this just an entry point so that you can then transition to all these other devices that will store music but also work on multiple platforms?

[Ferne Downey]

It should eventually become technology-neutral, but we're still in the mire of having technologies needing to be assigned—

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

So if it's technology-neutral, you are saying it would apply to all devices that store music.

[Ferne Downey]

I'm not saying it is currently technology-neutral, but wouldn't that be an ideal place to work toward?

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

That is what you would like to see. You would like to see a technology-neutral approach, where a digital levy would apply to all devices that store music.

[Ferne Downey]

We're sticking with MP3 players, and that next baby step will be adequate at this time.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

But that's not your end goal. That's where you want to start. I understand.

Mr. Waddell, just to be clear, how many times should consumers pay for music? You said creators should be paid when people want to make a copy. If I'm following the rules and I buy a song on iTunes, I buy a licence to make five copies, but you're saying I should also pay a levy on the device I want to copy it onto. How many times should I pay?

[Stephen Waddell]

Mr. Del Mastro, actually, when you buy a tune on iTunes, you only get the opportunity to transfer it once. You don't get an opportunity to transfer it multiple times.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

But I should pay more than once?

[Stephen Waddell]

The principle, Mr. Del Mastro, that we're speaking about is that copies have value—

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Copies have value.

[Stephen Waddell]

—especially in the digital environment, in which you can create perfect copies.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

But if I buy the right to make a copy, Mr. Waddell—

[Stephen Waddell]

If you buy the right to make a copy, you should pay for the right to make a copy, and that's all we're saying, Mr. Del Mastro.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

And how many times should I pay for the right to make a copy, if I've already paid for the right to make a copy?