I'd like to mention two exceptions that were included in the law in 2012 and that complicate the situation enormously when it comes to consumers' choices.
In 1997, a private copy regime was adopted to allow consumers to reproduce music in the privacy of their homes. This was already being done quite commonly. Everyone has probably made or owned a recording of various songs they listened to in their cars on their way to the cottage or elsewhere. In 1997, the government determined that people would from then on be allowed to make such recordings for their own personal use, but that creators would be paid a royalty for every blank audio recording medium that was sold.
Unfortunately, the court decided that blank audio recording media did not include digital audio devices. That is why that royalty only applies now to blank CDs, a medium that is used less and less, it must be said.
In 2012, an exception was included in the Copyright Act to make it possible to copy music using devices that were not already covered under the private copy regime. In other words, it became legal to make copies on your iPod, if there are still any around, or using your iPhone. However, as opposed to what was done quite judiciously in 1997, when the decision was made to compensate creators for copies of their work, no compensation was provided for in 2012. That is unfortunate.
An exception was also included in the act for cases where people record a program in order to watch it later. There again, unfortunately, no payment was included in the act to compensate creators for this use of their work.
Ephemeral recordings made by broadcasters for their broadcast activities were also included. As I explained...