Industry Committee on April 26th, 2018

[John Degen]

Sure. You seem to be looking for a number, and I don't know if I can provide a better number.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

It doesn't have to be a number. You're not happy, if I understand it, with what exists today, so I need to at least understand what you would be happy with. They are happy. Is there a compromise or is there no compromise? That's what I'm looking for.

[John Degen]

I appreciate the question.

I think maybe one of the areas that we actually agree on is that bright lines are very difficult in terms of numbers when you're looking at fair dealing. I would instead look at it in terms of a condition, and that condition is that when an individual is claiming fair dealing, I think the consideration should be fairly broad. When an institution or a sector is claiming fair dealing, I think the consideration should be as narrow as possible so as not to damage an established market. That's what happened in 2012. A very broad exception was applied to a sector rather than to an individual, and our market was damaged if not completely destroyed.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Understood.

Ms. Amyot, do you have anything to add?

[Denise Amyot]

That is an excellent question, Mr. Baylis. If that's okay with you, I will ask my colleague to answer you. Since he works on the ground, he will be able to give you the facts and tell you what works and what doesn't.

[Dr. Mark Hanna, Associate Dean, The Business School, Humber Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, and Representative, Colleges and Institutes Canada]

I first have to say that I'm concerned when our colleagues are referring to faculty in institutions as copying in an unlimited fashion, because for everyone I've worked with, and everyone I currently work with, the goal with all librarians and faculty is to respect copyright and to minimize the amount of copying. That is, I think, the first thing.

If the belief is that copying is happening in a very irresponsible way, then your question really is key, but I think if we can at least consider the possibility that this is not the case, that it's not that people are looking to copy widespread. In fact, we are really trying to make sure we're not copying more than we should.... At the same time, I'd put the question to my colleagues that.... Let's say it was 5%. Are they saying that all the other trends that are happening in the industry wouldn't have had the same impact that they've had today? I don't believe that's the case.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Fair enough.

I'm interested in helping Canadian creators, not foreign creators. Is there something that the users—either the library or you—might see as some creative idea that could help our Canadian producers and our Canadian authors and writers? Do you have any thoughts on that?

[Victoria Owen]

After listening to the exchanges at the earlier meetings and trying to understand about the large numbers that seem to be missing from somebody's pocketbook, and where they're coming from, and where they're going, and who's missing them, I begin to understand....

Libraries and educational institutions are paying more. It seems that Statistics Canada is showing us that there's no harm being done to the publishing industry. Book sales in Canada are going up. Maybe we should look at what's happening within the industry with the distribution of that income. That's opaque. Who can see that? If we can't see it, we can't know where that's going and where the shortfall is. Maybe that's somewhere we could begin to have a look—at things that aren't clear or transparent. That might be one way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

We're going to move to Mr. Lloyd for five minutes.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you, and if I'm too quick, I'll be splitting some of my time with Mr. Jeneroux.

My first question is for Colleges and Institutes Canada.

You noted that you're spending more than ever on licensing. How much of your licensing budget goes towards Canadian content and Canadian authors?

[Denise Amyot]

I'll ask my colleague to talk about it, because, again, he will give you a precise example from a college. If you want something broader, I could give it to you after.

[Dr. Mark Hanna]

First I will say that Humber College is proud—my colleague mentioned a 26% increase—to report a 50% increase since 2012 in terms of expenditures, so we're on the high end of that average. We do purchase quite a bit of Canadian content, and I have a list here that I can share with you. I don't have a specific percentage, but I can definitely send that to the committee after the fact.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Do you pay Access Copyright any licensing fees?

[Dr. Mark Hanna]

We don't license with Access Copyright currently, no.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Which other Canadian groups would you pay for copyright then?

[Dr. Mark Hanna]

We have databases: Canada in Context, Canada's Information Resource Centre, Grey House Publishing Canada.... We have many, many Canadian resources that we license with.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Are those groups compensating writers and authors?

[Dr. Mark Hanna]

All I know about is the licence that we pay. I would have no insight, as my colleague mentioned, in terms of how the writers are paid.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you.

I guess my question would be to the publishers. Are these organizations that are receiving the licensing fees compensating your institutions and authors?

[Glenn Rollans]

Without knowing more about the licences, it's hard to be specific about that. What I can say is that, in some ways, we're talking about a distraction. If somebody says they're spending a lot of money here, and then when facts are examined in court or at the Copyright Board, the evidence says they're not spending any of that money here, we should have a very simple discussion. That's what we're talking about. Instead, we're in a situation now where mandatory tariffs are disregarded and not paid and where we have a licensing environment that has broken down because there is misinterpretation, unfair interpretation of fair dealing.

In general, that money is not coming to us. Our members report that transaction licensing is almost non-existent and the collective licensing revenue has almost disappeared. Access Copyright had its annual general meeting on Friday, and it's revenue from K to 12 and post-secondary is down 89%, and ironically, Canadian creators now from foreign educators get more licensing revenue than they get from Canadian sources.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you.

I guess this question is to John Degen. Would you call this an existential threat to Canadian content and Canadian culture in terms of creation in the future?

[John Degen]

Absolutely. I have members who have contacted me to say that they're very sorry but they can't pay their dues this year because they don't have the dependable revenue that they used to have. It's not a pension. It's payment for use. Their work is still being used. The payment has just disappeared.

They're dropping out. They're saying they can't do it anymore.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Thank you.

In 2015, then science minister Ed Holder put forward a policy on public access for the granting councils, NSERC, SSHRC, and CIHR, that everything must be freely accessible within 12 months.

I'll ask this of Colleges and Institutes Canada first. What is your institutions' and your organizations' position on if this were to extend to private, not the granting councils, but to other funding research through government? Would you be supportive of a policy such as that?

[Denise Amyot]

First, as you know, with colleges, in the applied research that we do, we do not keep the IP most of the time.

Your question is a very complex question and I believe it's a question for government to decide, but in consultations with a variety of stakeholders because there are different aspects to that. At the end of the day, we need to look at what's in the best interest of the country. As to principles, Canadians need better access to government-subsidized research and we agree that all should be made available for free to the public, but there need to be some exceptions. That might be because sometimes it needs to be kept confidential for proprietary reasons, or because there are revenues that are attached.

I have to say yes in principle, but there need to be some exceptions.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Thank you very much.

I'm out of time.