Evidence of meeting #187 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendments.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
Do you mean businesses in Canada, or do you mean international businesses? Who is having the difficulty figuring it out?
6:20 p.m.
Past President, Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
I think for the most part it's mostly SMEs that we're dealing with in Canada. Internationally, we deal with intellectual property rights in council from other jurisdictions every single day. There is a generally regarded acknowledgement of the profession in Germany, the U.K. and Australia. We don't see it as much internationally, perhaps, as we do in Canada.
If you're trying to get SMEs involved in protecting their intellectual property, you want to make sure they get the right professionals to be their advisers and obtain their rights before the Canadian Intellectual Property Office.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
How much time do I have left? Oh, it's just one minute.
Just to go back, just as a suggestion—because I think there may be an amendment I might propose—maybe other international jurisdictions have an acronym also that goes along with the protected title, but that will be a source....
Trust me; there will be individuals out there who will see it as an opportunity to misrepresent themselves by using the acronym to get around some of the rules that have been created here. That's why the accounting profession, engineers, lawyers and others protect the word and the shorthand title. It's just a cover to ensure that people don't misrepresent themselves, especially when you have a college that's been created. It gives another opportunity to misrepresent, in advertising especially. Especially now with the advent of online advertising, that's the popular way to misrepresent one's professional qualifications.
I'll just leave it at that.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. Thank you.
Before I come over to Mr. Sorbara for the last round, Mr. Louie, I know you've come a long way and there have been no questions to you and Mr. Bear.
Do you want to take a couple of minutes to sum up your points that you didn't get to make?
6:20 p.m.
Chair of Advisory Board, First Nations Land Management Resource Centre
I would appreciate that, and thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I certainly understand the patience here of the committee and the time delays.
I just want to sum up with this. We are in support of the amendments here.
When we're talking about UNDRIP, these are very important provisions, and I think all of the federal legislation needs to reflect this.
We're certainly very supportive of the majority vote, because in this particular case, while we've had two first nations that have unanimously passed their land codes—both of them in British Columbia, in Lake Cowichan and Yakweakwioose—we've had 33 first nation votes across Canada that didn't achieve the threshold, despite community votes ranging from 51% to 90% approval. They didn't pass on the first go-round.
I want to emphasize that only seven votes in the past 20 years were outright “no” votes, so having this amendment here for the majority vote is absolutely necessary, and I applaud the committee members and Parliament for this.
On Yukon lands, having land set aside is very important. We want Yukon involved. Yukon is there, so having inclusion for Yukon first nations is great.
Having the ratification officer replace the verifier will save a lot of money, and this is good. The administrative use of electronic votes is very desirable.
Having not only revenue monies transferred to a first nation when it passes a land code, but also capital monies that are held in the Ottawa trust account through the Department of Indian Affairs, is very, very important.
On enforcement provisions, there are some good aspects in that regard.
Of course on the additions to reserves, for example, my own community spent 17 years to get one particular reserve added to the reserve when we had full provincial support, so anything that can expedite that through ministerial order, as proposed here, is certainly going to help.
Things of that nature we applaud, and we thank you very much, Mr. Chair and the honourable members, for having us here.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. McKay, I was born and raised in Prince Rupert in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, and I know the beautiful area you live in.
Michael Geist and Grant Lynds, I'm not an IP or copyright expert, but I've tried to get up to speed very quickly. My understanding is there's a lot of good stuff in the BIA, and I'm happy with that, but I've also heard we may need to look at some things.
Take a minute, Grant, and then we'll go over to Michael. Can you comment on where we can improve on these aspects?
6:25 p.m.
Past President, Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
You mean in all this legislation?
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
I mean legislation that pertains to IP and copyright.
6:25 p.m.
Past President, Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
In IP and copyright, I think on the patent side we touched the file history estoppel, which I think is proposed section 53.2. The major issue that came from our members with respect to that was the timing, because it's in force right away, so that would impact current litigation. In current litigation you're dealing with experts who have been advised of the state of the law, and the file history estoppel brought in with this new legislation was not part of our regime. I think that's the biggest area where we could improve by addressing the transitional aspect of that section and at a minimum saying that it should not apply to any ongoing action or proceeding. I think a little transition time is needed if that's the provision that's going to come into force.
6:25 p.m.
Dr. Michael Geist
With Mr. Fergus I touched on a couple of the possibilities with respect to how the notice-and-notice provisions could be improved. There are two others, just to reiterate: Number one, I think some of the patent changes are very good, and they've been long discussed, especially around the issue of trying to deal with patent trolls. I think the problem is that we know what we want, yet by putting it off into the regulation-making process, we're delaying the effectiveness by several years at a time when innovation is a significant part of the government's overall strategy.
The department says they know what they'd like to see included. I don't see any reason we couldn't include, let's say on patent demand letters as a start, precisely what the requirements would be, so that this could take effect at the same time the full bill takes effect, as opposed to putting it off by several years.
Number two, as I mentioned, has to do with linking the IP strategy issues in copyright with the emphasis that we've seen on artificial intelligence, AI. We've now had just about every major player in the AI space argue that there is a significant barrier within the copyright system that they do not face in the United States, Europe or Japan, so given the investment we've put into this, a one-line change within the Copyright Act would make it clear there is an exception for what's known as informational analysis or text and data mining. It effectively allows those engaged in artificial intelligence, in research, and later in commercialization, to ensure the data they are using can be used without fear of engaging in copyright infringement.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, can we ask Mr. Geist to forward that one line to us?
6:30 p.m.
Dr. Michael Geist
Absolutely.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Can we have Mr. Lynds forward the information that's pertinent to his concerns, please?
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
It should be done as quickly as possible, I think. Somebody made the point that we need this information fairly quickly.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you.
Committee members, we'll meet at 8:45 tomorrow morning in the room across the hall.
Thank you to all the witnesses for your presentations and putting the effort into your submissions and your work.
The meeting is adjourned.