Evidence of meeting #9 for Canadian Heritage in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was content.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Senior Vice-President, Industry and Policy, Canadian Media Producers Association
There was talk about short collaborations today. It's very important for us to work together. For example, we met with the department together a few weeks ago. We work with various media stakeholders. The production of television content is quite complex. There are a lot of licences and things that have to be considered. A lot of work gets done between creators and producers.
Indeed, that's part of the process that has been done, and we hope that it will continue.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Thank you, Mr. Champoux.
Mr. Généreux, you have the floor for five minutes.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to all the witnesses.
Mr. Roberge, to my knowledge, the Department of Canadian Heritage is also responsible for Sport Canada. Hockey, to name just one Canadian sport, is part of our heritage.
In a context where artificial intelligence is a tool—it isn't necessarily a creative tool, but a work tool—do you believe that the creative world in Canada, whatever it may be, is becoming one of our greatest prides?
Listening to you, Mr. Roberge, I get the impression that we're heading straight for a wall, without seeing that this tool, artificial intelligence, can become a springboard for our Quebec and Canadian artists, our athletes, and so on.
I'm not sure I understood you, so could you clear that up?
Full Professor, Chaire de recherche du Québec sur l’intelligence artificielle et le numérique francophones
Mr. Généreux, it's important to first make a distinction between the Department of Canadian Heritage and the other departments. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe another department is responsible for sports. It's a possibility.
There are various ways of calculating the impact of artificial intelligence on cultural industries. In reality, though, we have no evidence. We don't have any basic data right now. That means we're flying blind, which is problematic in itself. The little bit of data we do have isn't very good. I'll give you the example of audiovisual jobs in Montreal since COVID‑19. You might say that COVID‑19 has had many effects, as was the case with the strikes in Hollywood. However, audiovisual employment in Montreal is 50% lower today than it was before COVID‑19. You can either celebrate that or try to find solutions to the problem.
For now, we're bringing your attention and the attention of all members of Parliament to the challenges and problems whose nature we don't know. It isn't by discussing the lack of data that we'll be able to address those issues properly. I'm not saying that it's absolutely necessary to be pessimistic and criticize artificial intelligence. That's not what I'm saying at all. Our goal, then, is to be realistic and to base public policy decisions on serious evidence that can move the debate forward.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
Okay. I hope my question didn't lead you to believe that I was happy that jobs were lost in Montreal, in the film industry or in any other field. That was absolutely not the point of my question.
Mr. Capobianco, do you consider influencers to be artists to some extent?
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder, BILI Social
You would definitely be able to define influencers as creators. Many create a lot of original content; they create their own content. I think the word “artist” is subject to the recipient and how they define it, but certainly a number of them are creators who are creating unique content that relates to the audience who is interested in their material.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
You brought up the world of sport earlier. My colleague asked you a question about the union you're affiliated with to help players or former players from various sports teams. I imagine the same would be possible in the world of arts and culture. For example, you could partner with musical artists, television artists or influencers to promote any of your major clients. Influencers could even create content for your clients.
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder, BILI Social
Yes, absolutely.
From the brand perspective that we represent, they're interested in people—creators—who attract and engage an audience, whether that's an athlete, an artist or a performer. If they attract audiences, then various brand partners, etc., are interested, and I could see the same model applying.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
Mr. Dubois, Ms. Broadfoot and Mr. Strati, the purpose of this study is to see how a balance could be achieved. Artificial intelligence is a tool that enables any artist to make absolutely incredible advances. Artists can use this equipment and these tools to make themselves noticed, promote themselves and so on. However, they have to be able to make a living with it, using the necessary income from copyrights that are registered or created by the associations you represent. Do you think it's already too late to strike that balance, or do you think that's achievable?
We hear testimony from various groups, from representatives of various bodies and from various types of people, including artists, to make sure we learn everyone's point of view.
I'll let you answer my question now.
Executive Director, Société des auteurs et autrices de radio, télévision et cinéma
The most important word in your question is “balance”—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Excuse me, Mr. Dubois. There seems to be an issue with the interpretation.
I'm told it's working now.
There are 30 seconds left. You may continue.
Executive Director, Société des auteurs et autrices de radio, télévision et cinéma
The word “balance” is probably the most important. Negotiating is what we do. The problem is that we're now in a world where, if there isn't negotiation, it's survival of the fittest—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Please excuse me, but we would also like to hear Mr. Généreux's question again, since we didn't all hear it.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
I'll repeat my question.
Contrary to what I heard earlier, to me, people who use artificial intelligence are creators. Yes, it's a creative tool, but one day, artificial intelligence will also create on its own.
Is it still possible in Canada to strike a balance between creators using artificial intelligence technology and the need to have organizations like the one you represent, which manage copyright related to existing creations? Is it too late?
Executive Director, Société des auteurs et autrices de radio, télévision et cinéma
Thank you for your question.
It's not too late, sir, but that's going to take a very clear framework, because it's currently survival of the fittest. If parties can't be forced to negotiate as part of a social dialogue, it will be too late.
Today, we need you to build a framework that will allow for that balance.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
I'd also like to point that we lost two years to studying Bill C‑27 at the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, where I sat—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
I'm sorry, Mr. Généreux, but the time is up. You were able to hear the answer twice.
Mr. Ntumba, you have the floor for five minutes.
Liberal
Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba Liberal Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here.
As my colleague Martin Champoux was saying, you've provided us with truly a lot of information on this specific topic. Even I would have needed some of the questions to be reworded.
I want to talk about the collective licensing model for all artificial intelligence training data. It would be a model similar to the one used to manage music rights.
Mr. Strati and Mr. Dubois, would you support such a model? If so, how could that be implemented?
Senior Vice-President, Industry and Policy, Canadian Media Producers Association
When there's innovation, it's essential for balance to be restored. That has been done for years in response to various innovations that are now part of our culture and available services.
In the same way, for us, the collective aspect arose from the evolution of copyright and the way it was managed. If it's easier for the copyright user to take the collective approach, they can do that. If it's more important for them to negotiate party by party, they can do that too. That's part of the evolution. Both options are possible.
Lawyer and Labor Relations Advisor, Société des auteurs et autrices de radio, télévision et cinéma
I completely agree with Mr. Strati.
It's also important to remember that the collective agreement is the result of a negotiation and a process that's already provided for in the Copyright Act, where decisions are made by the Copyright Board of Canada. That means it's possible to negotiate licences on an individual basis, just as it's possible to negotiate collective agreements to grant collective licences. There are already processes for that, in music, for example, as you said.
The most important thing is to ensure that creators have the choice of whether or not to subscribe to a collective licence. They shouldn't be forced to do so.
Liberal
Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba Liberal Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC
Thank you very much.
Mr. Wyatt, in your opening remarks, you said that it was important to pivot when it came to artificial intelligence. Can you explain what you mean by that?
Founder and Executive Director, AI Governance and Safety Canada
After the 2019 election, Justin Trudeau had plans for the year, but everything changed when COVID‑19 hit. The impacts of smarter-than-human artificial intelligence—what advanced labs could create—are in that range. We're talking about a pivot in the sense that the government has to look at all the files, ask itself how they will suffer the consequences of artificial intelligence, and determine the plan's new priorities.
It's difficult to express the scope of what we're facing and the urgency with which we need to act. People tell themselves that it'll happen in three years and that there's time, but it takes years to implement legislation and government initiatives, and we're talking about decades when it comes to global agreements. If there are less than 18 months to prepare for a level of artificial intelligence that could have very significant impacts not only on national security, but also on public safety, jobs, human relations, culture and so on, then artificial intelligence will disrupt all the files that matter to us.
When people look at artificial intelligence today, they think it has capabilities but that it won't necessarily disrupt everything. Today's artificial intelligence is adolescent, childish.
When artificial intelligence matures, which it may in a few years, it will outperform us in all fields. It will be very useful in creating incredible content, solving all of our technology problems, strengthening economic regulations and so on.
The fact remains that the upcoming wave is of the same order of magnitude as COVID‑19.
Liberal
Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba Liberal Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Tessari L'Allié.
I'll turn to you now, Mr. Roberge.
Of all the measures that Parliament should adopt to ensure that artificial intelligence strengthens Canada's cultural sovereignty instead of undermining it, which is the most urgent?
Full Professor, Chaire de recherche du Québec sur l’intelligence artificielle et le numérique francophones
Thank you for your question.
I think we need a written, thoughtful strategy that can be translated into a regulatory framework. The point of view I'm defending is to create a Canadian artificial intelligence strategy for and by cultural communities or creative industries, which are more or less the same thing. The purpose of that would be to find what we previously discussed with Mr. Généreux, namely the issue of the balance between artificial intelligence and people.
First, is it the job of Canadian Heritage to try to defend the country's creative and cultural industries to eventually reach a state of balance, rather than already thinking about the balance based on what the AI industries are expected to do in culture?
Second, regarding the current state of imbalances within the Canadian government and state, I draw your attention to the announcement from the minister of artificial intelligence and digital innovation about the 26 members of the artificial intelligence strategy task force, as part of the 30‑day national sprint. To my knowledge, no one in that group of 26 comes from the cultural industry, strictly speaking. You can see, then, that this current level of imbalance is a level of desire to move forward in the world of artificial intelligence without exactly standing up for Canadian cultural industries.
That's why there may be some apprehension about the ability to return to a state of balance after the fact.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Thank you, gentlemen.
Mr. Diotte, you have the floor for five minutes.