If we were concerned about them, there would be a compensation regime, and students would be able to take their notes home, because there's nothing to stop any student from making a PDF and flipping their class notes all over the world. So we have a two-tier standard.
I need to move on quickly.
I'd ask the ministry to comment on the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council study that's being delivered at WIPO on December 1, which has said quite clearly that the enforcement mechanisms in place have not done anything to alleviate piracy.
I'd like to quote to you from Canada's largest music publisher, ole, that has said that:
Bill C-32 contains measures that have failed in other countries' technological protection measures, and the government is mimicking certain US copyright concepts. There is no reason to believe that this legislation in Canada will be anything but a failure.
They go on to say that...on the one hand, they put on the locks, and music publishers aren't believing this is going to work. They say “...Bill C-32 guts the two most digitally-savvy provisions in the current Copyright Act—the Broadcast Mechanical Tariff and the Private Copying provision”, which is bringing in $30 million a year to the music industry right now, with no new compensation plan to replace it.
Our question here, as the opposition, is, how is it we can say we'll have absolute sacrosanct rights for locks that may or may not work, whereas your bill targets the compensation of the artists, who are now supposed to do this for free?