Evidence of meeting #127 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 artists.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Okay.
You indicated that you'd like the Copyright Act to be left alone. Can you explain briefly your major impetus for wanting that to stay as is?
4:40 p.m.
Vice-President, Legal and Business Affairs, Stingray Digital Group Inc.
We believe that copyright, as it is now, works. We understand that the artists are complaining. We do believe that there are solutions that need to be put in place, but we don't believe that those solutions mean reviewing the Copyright Act.
Part of the solution is that—and this is something I will address tomorrow with the other committee—we believe that some of the use of music should be brought under the Broadcasting Act and should be regulated. For example, if you play a radio in your retail outlet, the radio station is subject to the minimum Canadian content requirement, the 35% that my colleague was explaining earlier.
If you use the services of a commercial background music supplier.... Stingray is one of the biggest music suppliers to commercial outlets in Canada. We're not subject to any Canadian content requirement. We can play whatever we want. We made a submission in front of the CRTC last February. We proposed that commercial background music suppliers be subject to the same Canadian content minimum requirement, so that if you use the Stingray service in a commercial outlet, you will be hearing the same type of Canadian content as if you play radio or if you listen to your TV channel in your home, because TV channels are also subject to the same Canadian requirements.
That's one example of our saying this is where we need to make sure that royalties are going to Canadian artists and that we hear Canadian artists, but not review the Copyright Act.
4:45 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Does the NCRA or the CAB agree or disagree with Madame Francoeur, and what is your major impetus for your agreement or your disagreement with her analysis?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
Do you mean with this last proposal?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
I think we never had a chance to discuss it. This is new to us, but we think measures that would help Canadian artists are good. If regulation were to be put on background music suppliers to increase Canadian content, I don't think we would be opposed to that. I think we would support that measure.
4:45 p.m.
Regulatory Affairs Director, National Campus and Community Radio Association
We generally stay away from commenting on how other broadcasters and broadcasters in other sectors should be regulated and what they should be required or not required to pay, because it's outside our area of expertise and, in particular, because we operate on a not-for-profit basis. I'm sitting here as a volunteer. I have a day job that is not doing what I'm talking about right now. So my scope of knowledge is somewhat limited, and I do have to focus just on what I can say about our sector and not about the others. To some extent, our mandates overlap and we can talk a little about what we share and what we do that may affect each other in positive or negative ways; but in terms of a proposal, I would rather not comment at this stage.
4:45 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
That's okay. Thank you.
The reason I asked this question is that we have different organizations sitting here, and it seems that, at the end of the day, all of you would like to see musicians get their fair share, for lack of a better term. But that goes with—if I'm hearing correctly—not making too many substantial changes to the act because, as you mentioned, Madame Dorval, if you pull on one side, the other side... There is an ecosystem. What then are the changes that are required, if any, to ensure that our musicians get their fair share?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
As I said, maybe we have to look at it from a different viewpoint.
I said that Bryan Adams was before this committee, and he proposed something that is very different, something outside the box. That could probably be achieved through legislative changes or something different that has been proposed by the record labels, for example.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm trying to get some timelines that we are crunching here. There's a good chance that by the time this committee gets a report done, and has handed it to the minister, and the minister gets the report back to Parliament....If the government actually wanted to introduce legislation, it could take some time. It may not happen before the next general election. My concern is that we have nothing.
Maybe starting with you Ms. Wheeler, and then finishing with our friends from Vancouver, what would be the top priority for things to be done, if you had one or two, really quickly? Or status quo, if that's what it is, because the parliamentary session is winding down.
4:50 p.m.
Chair, Copyright Committee, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
Yes, status quo would be our top priority, in terms of ensuring some predictability and stability for the local broadcast sector, which is undergoing a lot of change and challenges these days.
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Legal and Business Affairs, Stingray Digital Group Inc.
Same thing, status quo, in terms of the Copyright Act. We do believe that additional changes need to be made, but they would be outside the Copyright Act review.
4:50 p.m.
Regulatory Affairs Director, National Campus and Community Radio Association
I would say the same thing. With respect to the one section that I spoke about, obviously the sector would prefer to see that not change. I am unable to speak about other aspects of the act.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
We're at the end of our first round. We have some committee business to do at the end. We have time for about five minutes on each side.
Mr. Longfield.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Thanks. I'll share my time with Mr. Lametti.
My frustration, I guess that's the word, is trying to find an equitable balance, where the creators of music can be paid for their creations and not be in poverty. They're either in poverty, or very successful; there seems to be no in-between.
It's frustrating to try to find the right suggestions, particularly where there are revenue streams that are outside....Possibly, the frustration today is that the revenue streams aren't in this room.
Could you comment on what we are missing, in terms of balance?
Ms. Dorval, do you have anything? I think radios are playing a key role, as you said, in local news and other services, advertising local businesses and keeping local economies going.
4:50 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
We really are big supporters of culture and Canadian artists. We are promoting them, paying royalties, contributing in content development every year. We are true supporters of Canadian artists.
It's a bit frustrating for us, too. As my colleague was saying, it's more of a contractual relationship. Artists who are at their debut are not going to have the bargaining power to possibly make a good deal with a record label. That's where it seems to be—
4:50 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
Yes.
I don't really have an answer for you as to how we undo this thing.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
Thank you, everyone.
You have just described an ecosystem that has been more or less balanced since 1997 and to which you are able to adapt.
Are you concerned about the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. SODRAC 2003 Inc.?
Is this in the pipeline, is it something that you're worried about? It will have more of an impact on television, but is it something that might upset this ecosystem that you have described?
4:50 p.m.
Chair, Copyright Committee, Canadian Association of Broadcasters
It was our understanding that's the decision dealing with the definition of sound recording.