Evidence of meeting #121 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was content.
A recording is available from Parliament.
General Manager, Artisti
I don't know. I may not have been born yet. No, that's not true; I had been born by 1997, as you can probably imagine.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Okay, we will look into that.
I have another question, about rates. I believe I heard you say that in Canada, YouTube or Spotify content is priced much lower than in the United States.
General Manager, Artisti
Yes, precisely.
As I said, there is a rate for non-interactive or semi-interactive webcasting. I will explain the difference.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
I understood it.
Let's start with non-interactive streaming.
For comparison's sake, while artists in the United States are paid 11¢, artists in Canada are paid only 1¢, correct?
General Manager, Artisti
Yes, exactly. They are paid eleven times less. It is 10.78¢, specifically.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
So according to these rates, if it is 11¢ in the U.S., it's 1¢ here.
General Manager, Artisti
It's for non-interactive and semi-interactive streaming.
General Manager, Artisti
I couldn't tell you. It was a decision made by the Copyright Board of Canada. I don't know what criteria were used to set rates that are so much lower here than in the U.S.
And currently the gap is growing, because since then, the rates in the United States have increased.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
It is the Copyright Board of Canada that makes these decisions?
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
This isn't really something that is ever submitted to us.
General Manager, Artisti
You could nevertheless include guidelines in the act to set criteria, for instance.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
With regard to YouTube or Spotify, are you satisfied with the amount, or not?
General Manager, Artisti
With regard to non-interactive and semi-interactive streaming, no. Regarding YouTube, we can't be happy with the amount, because as I said, for the time being it is zero, aside from certain arrangements that might be included in contracts between artists and producers.
Liberal
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, everybody, for taking the time to be here today.
I do want to go back to you, Mr. Lewis. You made some interesting comments earlier about the FairPlay proposal, which has attracted a great deal of concern from those who want to preserve net neutrality. You did mention that you support net neutrality, which is good to hear. However, I do want to get to the bottom of some of your comments.
Currently, as you indicated, the FairPlay proposal is asking that a board of industry players be created, who would ask the CRTC to demand that ISPs block websites they deem to be perpetuating piracy. The chief concern with this proposal is that there would be no court involvement before the site would be taken down. In response to this concern, you said—and other FairPlay representatives have said—that complainants could appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal after the site has been pulled.
Why not address these genuine concerns head-on and change the proposal to bring in court oversight before the offending sites are taken down?
International Vice-President and Director of Canadian Affairs, International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees
I used to work at the Ontario Labour Relations Board—again, a quasi-judicial tribunal—the decisions of which would be in effect.... There was the ability for any party to bring a judicial review or application to the courts to review that, but the decision would be in effect. It's our tradition that those decisions are in effect pending a judicial review. An offending party could seek an injunction to stay the decision of the CRTC, pending a review by the Federal Court of Appeal. There is already built into the system, then, the ability for someone, if so aggrieved, to bring that kind of motion to stay the effect of the CRTC determination, pending an appeal at the Federal Court of Appeal. Once again, it's timing in all of this.
We're a North American organization, and in the United States we have taken on the current administration with our concerns about net neutrality, and we're spending considerable resources fighting that fight. We take it very seriously. I know that any time you talk about any type of blocking, my own members, particularly younger members, get very nervous and concerned about it.
Again, I look at other jurisdictions.... And here I would note that I was wrong: it's 40 countries and not 30 countries that have enacted similar legislation elsewhere. Sometimes they bring in a judicial component earlier in the process, but there is the same type of methodology. There is an ability, anyway, to seek to stay a decision pending a review by the court of appeal.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
What have you done in the United States recently, then? The concerns about net neutrality seem to have subsided somewhat. You said you have been spending a number of resources. What exactly are they?
International Vice-President and Director of Canadian Affairs, International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees
The whole industry was lobbying, and I don't know if it was the Senate or Congress, but they didn't get the votes to enact the provisions the current administration wanted to enact.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
It's good to hear that you're supportive of net neutrality, because I do know there has been a lot of concern within the community about that.
In my last minute I want to quickly go over the Kodi boxes. You brought those up at the beginning. Where are these coming from? If they are shut down, are they starting back up? Are these parties outside of Canada that are setting up these boxes? Are they being sold underground? I hope you'd appreciate that I don't know much about them, which I guess is probably a good thing in the witnesses' mind. Could you just give a little bit more background for us.
International Vice-President and Director of Canadian Affairs, International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees
We'll provide more background. We're going to provide a fuller statement to this committee with our submissions.
However, here's the problem in all of this. Because it's become so blatant, the need to be underground has been alleviated. No one is taking any enforcement issues seriously because it's so blatant. That is the real concern. There's a blasé attitude towards it. To some, it's not a physical good; it's not stealing a pack of cigarettes or a car. It's this notion of intellectual property.
We were criticized as an industry, with people saying that there is no other place to get this, that the industry was slow off the uptake in having a vehicle like Netflix, CraveTV, and all of these others that weren't there and weren't too expensive. That's been taken care of. That's been addressed. What's the excuse now, other than that you just want free product?
Liberal
