Now, I've reviewed the Copyright Act. There's no reference to user rights. That term is not used. In fact, the only reference to user rights that I've seen is in the CCH case, where I believe it's used once. In fact, it's not even....
The Supreme Court that's actually creating the term is simply adopting how some of these rights are described by others in the industry. I do know that the Copyright Act refers to “sole right” on at least nine or ten different occasions, and each time it's the right of the copyright holder. That has to be our starting point when we're dealing with copyright.
The creators, they create something. They have the right to ownership in that. When we create additional rights for users, perhaps to circumvent digital locks, that's a derogation of the powers or the rights that copyright holders have.
So we have to be very careful as we move in that direction that we do so in a measured way, which again is why the minister's power to regulate allows us to adapt to the changing environment and to learn from the experience going forward.
I'm quite confident that the minister, whoever it might be going forward, is going to act very reasonably in ensuring that users have access to fair dealing and if required are able to circumvent to do so. But we want to make sure that the copyright holders also have the ability to enforce their copyrights. That is the starting point, defending private property, which is found in copyright.
Again, when we're trying to find that balance, it's usually a quid pro quo. It goes both ways. There are many creators who are saying that balance has been shifting very much in favour of the users and very little going back to the creators.
I just want to leave that with you.