Industry Committee on May 11th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Yes, you are way out of time.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Okay, I'll come back. I have another question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

You'll have more time to get back to her.

We're going to move to Mr. Lloyd.

You have seven minutes.

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

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for coming today, and for your excellent presentations.

My first question will be for you, Ms. Middlemass.

[Christine Middlemass]

Could I invite our copyright expert, Donald Taylor, to the table?

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

Absolutely.

[Christine Middlemass]

I don't want to get myself into trouble.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Just for the record, please state your name and your position.

[Donald Taylor, Copyright Representative, British Columbia Library Association]

I'm Donald Taylor. I am the Copyright Representative for the British Columbia Library Association.

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

My question is for either Mr. Taylor or Ms. Middlemass.

What is your experience with TPMs at the level of your institution? How do you interact with TPMs? Can you give us some examples of TPMs in your field?

[Donald Taylor]

In libraries, the classic version of TPMs would be electronic books. Unlike journals, most electronic books come with some type of technological protection measure, which in some cases prevents any printing or downloading entirely, so you can't exercise any fair dealing rights whatsoever, and you cannot send a chapter on interlibrary loan. You can't do anything with it; it's just completely locked down. They go from that to limiting printing or downloading to 1% or 5%.

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

They allow you to print 1% or 5%?

[Donald Taylor]

It would depend on who the provider of the content is.

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

But it's not fixed so that you can't print at all?

[Donald Taylor]

In some cases you can't print at all; you can't download at all; you can't do anything.

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

Are there any other cases?

[Donald Taylor]

It certainly also will mean we have some databases of content that, again, has the same kind of restrictions. It's quite typical with standards organizations that they will just lock it down super tight.

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

One question has been brought up consistently, generally by the libraries. They would like the ability to override contracts if the reason they want to override the contracts is covered under fair use. Why can't it just be negotiated into the contracts in the first place that fair use be respected? Why do you believe the government should give you the power to override a contract? The reason we have contracts, as you know, is to be in agreement, to have stability, to be a standard. If the government introduces that you can override a contract, that lowers market standards, and it creates uncertainty, which is what the government does not want to create.

Can you maybe tell me why you can't just do that at the beginning and make a deal in the contract? Why does there have to be a government power to override?

[Donald Taylor]

One part of it is that we believe, for example, fair dealing is in the Copyright Act because the government deemed it to be good public policy. To have a licence for information resources that obviated that fair dealing right completely would be counter to good public policy.

Also, there is a bargaining imbalance between libraries and vendors. Many times a vendor will just say, “Take it or leave it”, and the poor library is in a situation in which community users desperately want that resource. So eventually you just say, “Fine, we'll take whatever it is you're giving us.” Even though we might be spending millions of dollars per year on resources, the organization we are negotiating with has many times that, and they have all kinds of buyers. So there is certainly a market—

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

So the contractors aren't willing to give you—

[Donald Taylor]

That's what I mean.

Certainly, the first step you try is to negotiate it.

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

Yes.

[Donald Taylor]

You always ask, “Hey, could we please put in a clause that says nothing in this licence overrides the Canadian Copyright Act?”

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

Thank you. I appreciate that insight.

My next question is for UBC and Madam Parker.

If you are moving to digital content—and this seems to be the consensus across the board, that digital is the way you're moving, as are transactional licences—this may seem like a silly question, but why is the protection of education under fair use important, if you're moving to digital content and away from print? If we took education or clarified education, why is that a problem for you, if you're already moving away and into other fields?

[Susan Parker]

I don't know that it's necessarily a problem. I think that it's an insurance so that something like what was just described doesn't become more normative in licensing.

Right now fair dealing helps us negotiate licences that allow us to do certain things with content. We put them into our course reserve systems that are walled off so that only students can use them for a time, and I think that's a really important tool. Otherwise, if you put the educational system of a university out into the marketplace with everyone else, the costs will also rise.

The market right now, I think, is tempered a bit. Even though we're spending a great deal on licensing material, it's nothing compared with what might happen should everybody be treated the same. I think maybe that's a carve-out we would like because it would be beneficial, but I think it also is a balancing act. I think the whole thing is a balancing act that publishers and libraries try to maintain.