I will continue on a more serious note.
I will speak to Ms. Rioux.
I also am new to this committee. I have an engineering background.
When you said that remedies in the digital age no longer exist, I liked it and I didn't like it.
It would seem that we are witnessing a major transformation of your industry. The big fish seem to be doing well, but the industry as a whole seems to be penalized. In 2012, our Conservative government introduced numerous amendments to the Copyright Act. Clearly, since then, there have been changes, even an upheaval, and the Liberal government is expected to show leadership. At this time, I get the impression that they are trying to buy time. It is aggravating, because our artists need to be given the necessary tools to adapt to current changes in technology.
You said that the problem had to be addressed at the source.
You said that we need to “stop the tap”.
I agree with you entirely.
So, there is an elephant in the room, and the best way to eat it is one bite at a time.
I will begin with the proposal put forward by Mr. Adams. Mr. Fauteux and Ms. Selman alluded to it, and I would like to know your opinion. Mr. Adams proposed that royalties be recovered 25 years after the agreement is signed by the artist, instead of 25 years after the artist's death.
If possible, I would like to know the Juno team's opinion on this, and your own, Ms. Rioux. Are you in favour of the proposal that royalties should be paid to the artist after 25 years?