Evidence of meeting #14 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was copyright.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
They certainly are. They implemented the two WIPO treaties in 1998. So as a fact, I can tell you they've taken a step that we haven't taken so far.
Conservative
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
It's something I don't feel comfortable to answer, because I think it's part of our international relationship with an important trading partner. I would prefer to refrain from answering that question.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Well, the reason I asked that is that I sense that the United States would be quite concerned about the fact that we may be developing a culture of entitlement in Canada to resources that are being produced by creators acting in good faith, on both sides of the border, and that we should be moving forward with haste to get this done.
I have one final question, Mr. Chair. In terms of enforcing, regulating, administering a new copyright act, do you sense that there will be a larger role for government to play, or do you sense that there should be more industry involvement in those rules?
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
Copyright is about private rights, to begin with, and it has always been our view that collaboration is key in order to try to reduce infringement in Canada and elsewhere. In the first place, rights holders have a big word to say, but the government has always been supportive of any action that could support and help the work they're doing.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I have a lot of sympathy for our witnesses, Mr. Chairman, because it's difficult for them to speculate at all. They can't. Their advice is to the government, and some of the questions should be better addressed to the government representatives, not the administration--perhaps the minister or even the parliamentary secretary. I have a great deal of sympathy with the position they're in, and I don't think we should be pushing them in a direction they can't go in.
But to answer the concern with respect to my last question of why we'd want information on who has been met, it's quite simple, quite straightforward. Whenever the legislation is tabled in the House and referred to a committee... First of all, I'm not even sure which committee is going to get it, whether it's heritage or industry or a joint committee. That is something that has yet to be determined, unless it has been determined. But what the government's wishes are there, I don't know.
Actually, that might be a question, but it would be a question directed--
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
It probably is, so I'm not going to ask it. The fact that I've left it hanging there is enough.
Whoever gets it, and I hope we will be involved somehow, I think it behooves us to be prepared. Throughout the spring and the summer and this fall, I have received, and I'm sure my colleagues around the table have as well, numerous requests for meetings. I want to accommodate as many of those as I can and I want to prepare as well as I can for whenever the legislation comes, so it would be useful to know which groups have been consulted by either department. That's a factual information requirement. There's no speculation needed there. I'm just asking for this year, and also if it's possible to obtain that information--and I don't know that it is not--which groups either minister has met. I know they've met some because I've met some of the same people, but if there are others I have not had a chance to meet, it would be useful to know that so that we too can get to know. We wish to have, inasmuch as is possible, a level playing field as we embark on this.
I remember Bill C-32, back in 1997. I was involved there. It was very complex legislation. We met at least 50 witnesses--groups and so forth--and I expect we'll be facing the same thing. So any preliminary work that can be done to help us individually and collectively, as we're doing here, understand what's coming would be useful. It's in that sense that the question was asked. It was nothing nefarious.
I'll repeat the question. If it's possible to get that information, I think it would be quite useful, because I don't know all the groups and I'm sure I don't know all of
the issues. There is a whole series of them, and I imagine that some will not be included in the bill, whereas others, which have not yet come to mind, will. It is better to be safe than sorry.
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Bélanger, it would be our pleasure to provide you with a list of associations we have met with. But, I cannot promise to give you a list of people the Minister's office or the Minister has met with. However, we can give you a list of people who have met with officials from both departments.
I must admit that over the last few months, we did not ask for feedback from any group. We have not held any official consultations. Those people who wish to talk to us, to meet with us or to share their concerns know which door to knock on. In that context, we have met with many people and received many briefs. It would be our pleasure to send you that list.
At this moment, however, I cannot tell you how much work that will entail. I have to admit that that is beyond my control. So I cannot promise you the list within a certain timeline, but I can commit to putting in the request. I could also let you know how much time it will take to get that list to you.
Director, Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Department of Industry
May I add something from the point of view of Industry Canada?
I will have to check to see whether I can provide that information. As Danielle said, I certainly can't commit on behalf of the minister's office.
I would be a little mindful of wanting to respect whatever feelings the people who've contacted us may have about their contact with us and whether there would be any dereliction on my part if I disclosed that. I would have to check into these matters.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Presumably we can also get some from the registrar of lobbyists.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have two or three straightforward questions.
How far along is the bill?
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
That is another indirect question about where we are heading.
I will simply repeat that the issues we discussed in the course of the day are those on which an awful lot of work has been done over the last few years. We are still working on these issues, because the current government has not taken any decision yet.
No issue, no subject has been taken off the drawing board, if I can use that expression. As soon as our respective Ministers or the government tell us what they have decided, we will be able to provide you with the appropriate documents.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Experience shows that when laws are developed, they very often benefit those that influence their creation in the early stages.
Do you receive any political orientation, either from Industry Canada or Canadian Heritage, in connection with the work that you are doing right now on this?
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
As I was saying, it is clear that the work that we are doing goes back some way. We even had the benefit of legislation being introduced in June 2005 which itself provoked a huge reaction from a lot of stakeholders. All those reactions and comments are carefully taken into consideration.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I will simplify my question. Where does the greatest pressure come from when you are working in this area?
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
It depends on the issue, but as I was saying earlier, we are dealing with matters relating to the implementation of the WIPO treaties covering all authors of musical works, dramatic works, that is, film...
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
There are two treaties. One is aimed at improving protection for authors. It includes authors of musical works, dramatic works, that is, films, as well as all those involved with computerized applications, computer programs, video games. All those people are also stakeholders in the process.
Finally, there are artistic works and photography. All of these people, as authors, have an interest in this process.
There is also the user side, which includes schools, museums, archives, libraries and all Canadians. With the Internet, everyone has access to copyright. All those stakeholders have a keen interest in the issue.
The liability of service providers is of interests to authors, makers of sound recordings, film producers and consumers in general. Then there is photography.
As I mentioned, photographers are obviously very interested in this issue, since Bill C-60 contained provisions that had a major impact on them. In fact, anyone who has a contract with a photographer to have pictures taken, so consumers in general, could be interested in this question.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Are you concerned about the proper balance between the creator and the consumer? If not, is it more the creator that you have in mind when you are doing your work?
Director, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage
When we made our first presentation before your committee on September 25th, we said that there were two basic principles that guided our work. The first was to consider new types of protection, new rights, in order to ensure that creators have the tools they need to be able to control how their works are used.
We also wanted to look at issues related to access. So the user side is taken into account. Those are the two cornerstones, the basic principles of the Copyright Act.
