Yes.
Evidence of meeting #3 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was goods.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #3 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was goods.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brant, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I had more than one question, but thank you first of all to the witnesses for being here, and thank you for your suggestions for amendments. I know that many amendments have been proposed by your organizations for the consideration of the minister in the final drafting, and we appreciate that.
Mr. Edwards, because you seem to represent a broad group of organizations, I'd like to ask you what the major impacts of counterfeiting and piracy are, from your experience and your electoral experience, but also for the broader group that you represent here today.
4:10 p.m.
Chair, Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network
The one that comes to mind is the safety aspect. CSA indicated here the need for breakers. Having breakers in an electrical system is the key link between the system running well and an overload situation, in which the breaker should clear the fault. If it doesn't, you have a fire or electrocution.
From our perspective, the safety problem is probably the most significant issue to avoid, by trying to prevent counterfeit products from coming in.
4:15 p.m.
NDP
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Thank you very much, Chair,
Thank you all for coming before us. I would love to have a forum in which Ms. Rowden and Mr. Geist could debate their perspectives at greater length. Unfortunately we don't have that.
A common theme in some of the comments is around the resourcing of CBSA to enforce this law. Frankly, without enforcement it doesn't mean anything.
Mr. Edwards, you talked about inadequate resourcing and the need for extra training.
You, Ms. Rowden, said that we need to assign more responsibilities to CBSA around goods in transit. Leaving aside the fact that Mr. Geist has a different perspective on that, with budget cuts of $143 million to CBSA last year, how are we adding more responsibilities without expanding the budget? And if we don't, does this bill actually mean anything?
4:15 p.m.
Chair, Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network
Is that question directed to me? I think the bill, with some of the amendments we have suggested, would probably go a long way to help prevent and stop the products from coming across the border.
CACN is a not-for-profit organization. We're volunteers in it; we have very little funding. One of the things we like to pride ourselves on is that we try to train Canada Border Services Agency people and RCMP and other police forces. We have spent a bit of time on that.
But I'm continually frustrated by the fact that it's like a drop in the bucket. If we go to the Niagara Falls border and train 50 border guards, as we did last year, and then come back in three months, 50% of them have gone on to other jobs, and we start over again. It's very difficult to maintain a level of understanding of what products look like.
They need some help on their side, and we're willing to help them, but we don't have funding either.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Dr. Geist, you made reference to parallel imports, which are not counterfeit product and may be targeted. Would you please explain what you mean by that? Give an example.
4:15 p.m.
Canada Research Chair, Internet and E-commerce Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
The concern would arise when you have something that is legally made or licensed in one jurisdiction and someone tries to license a similar or the same product in multiple places.
We had a major Supreme Court of Canada case at one time, believe it or not, over chocolate, which was licensed for sale in Europe, and then similar chocolate, namely Toblerone, was licensed for sale here.
These are perfectly legitimate goods, except that the rights holder may have assigned the rights to sell that product in Canada to a different person from the one who may be selling it, let's say, in Europe.
When these same products come across the border, they are legitimate products and can in fact have the effect of reducing consumer costs, and so we come close to what the government has talked about, without having a differentiation whereby Canadians often feel that they are paying more than consumers, let's say, in the United States or elsewhere.
The danger is, we need to ensure within this legislation those kinds of imports don't get caught up, because they are not counterfeit, even though rights holders may not be particularly happy about seeing that legitimate product being sold here in Canada. It's actually good for consumers when they can engage in that, so that Canadians don't face the higher price tag that can sometimes occur.
November 6th, 2013 / 4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Professor Geist, in your opening comments you spoke of health and safety, and of the value of the existing statutes and case law. You also spoke of the danger, of course, of unintended consequences. So with all of this in mind, would you please tell me briefly what you think of Bill C-8? Will it have unintended consequences, specifically for the generics industry?
4:15 p.m.
Canada Research Chair, Internet and E-commerce Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I think that the government has tried to craft certain things with the intention of trying to exclude some of that, although I know that you raised some concerns on some of the changes to the trademark definitions around distinctiveness. I think there are legitimate concerns on that.
I haven't been able to track claims that there are large numbers of cases that would bear out this change. I don't think that's the case.
My concern, particularly for generics and the distribution of generics, comes out of the in-transit issue. This is not speculation. In fact, I would argue it's not even unintended consequence. We know, based on the experience in other jurisdictions where you have the ability to target in-transit shipments, generic goods may well be swept up in that and the ability to see them shipped to the patients and people who need them most may be impeded.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you very much, Mr. Geist. So far so good.
Mr. Warawa, a brief question.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
To CSA, what certification bodies are there in Canada? There is CSA and UL. Are there others?
4:20 p.m.
Manager, Global Intellectual Property Protection, Canadian Standards Association
There is ETL and Intertek. They're the top three.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
If an electronic product with a brand name came in and it was suspected that it was a counterfeit and possibly dangerous item, and it was seized, it was detained, where does CSA come in to the equation, if it had a counterfeit CSA mark? Is it the rights holder or CSA that would get involved, or both?
4:20 p.m.
Manager, Global Intellectual Property Protection, Canadian Standards Association
It would be both. Most often, because the brand owner is our client, we hold sort of the liability to ensure that we are protecting our brand, and so we would work together in that situation.
Are you asking at present or how it would be in the future?
4:20 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I'm going to have to...that was enough of a squeak that it's damaging my integrity already.
Okay, as brief as possible.
4:20 p.m.
NDP
Glenn Thibeault NDP Sudbury, ON
I'll be as brief as possible.
So my colleague Ms. Charlton talked about how CBSA right now is under-resourced. We've heard it from all of you that we need to provide more training. They need more skills. Ms. Rowden, in relation to your statement on trans-shipments, since CBSA resources are already stretched over many competing priorities and we're going to be seeing more and more of these coming with this bill, it seems that paying for enforcement on goods that neither originate from nor are destined for Canada will come with a hefty price tag.
Why should Canada pay for this kind of enforcement?
4:20 p.m.
Chair, Sub-committee on Bill C-8, Past President, Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
The bill is not designed to have CBSA enforce it. CBSA will simply review and look for counterfeiting. If they're well trained and they identify counterfeits coming in, then it shouldn't matter to them if they identify counterfeits that are destined to stay here or counterfeits that are moving on through. In both cases they could advise the rights owner and the rights owner can decide what to do.