Evidence of meeting #132 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 arr.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Basically, you consider it to be a work of art still, with yourself as the art creator.
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec
It's only a tool, though.
4:40 p.m.
President, Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec
Yes, it's only a tool.
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec
Yes, it's only a tool, and there's always a person who has written the computer language behind it, so that the copyright law—
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Artists' Representation
It's a difficult question for us, because we don't really represent new media artists as much as we do visual artists and artists from regular media like film and video. I would agree, but it's not a sector we typically represent, really.
4:40 p.m.
President, Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec
I'll refer to an earlier example. I was watching the video when you asked the question about Rembrandt. Today, a computer is repainting a Rembrandt work. It's 2018, but in Rembrandt's time, all these issues didn't exist. We can already find photocopies of Rembrandt's works. It's already in the public domain. However, if someone reproduces a work today that I create using a computer, I'm still the artist. It doesn't matter that the computer was used to produce the work. The person who coded the digital language remains the person who created the work. The computer didn't create the work.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you.
I have about 45 seconds left, and I really want to go to Ms. McLaughlin.
You explained that it cost $32,000 to make sure that you had the copyright expenses, which were about $13,000. If I understood you correctly, the English portion or the French portion is smaller, and the others are a larger portion of the radio programming, and this is what's making it costly. Tracking is what's making it costly.
As you know, there are many jurisdictions that enjoy great diversity, and therefore it's left to much smaller radio stations to support that diversity. What would you recommend, if we want to find the balance between the cost and the copyright?
4:45 p.m.
General Manager, Radio Markham York Inc.
I think we have to create different classes and recognize that within the system there are different classes of stations. There are stations that have the benefit of having multiple outlets and various properties vertically integrated. That's a different class. They can probably afford to do more and to engage in this. As you know—you're from the area—we have no choice. We have to produce that. To make it locally relevant, we have to do that.
4:45 p.m.
General Manager, Radio Markham York Inc.
We need a different classification. We need exemptions for stations that are doing that kind of work.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just on that, Ms. McLaughlin, can you talk a little more about what kinds of exemptions you need? Again, speak from your own personal experience about what your radio station might entertain, but also generally. There might be a gap or a need that can be addressed by such an exemption for other radio stations.
4:45 p.m.
General Manager, Radio Markham York Inc.
The census is particularly onerous. That whole aspect of collecting around the clock, 52 weeks a year, is particularly trying. Up until about a year and a half ago, we were doing samples, but because we're caught up in that environment....
It would be more beneficial to the artist if in that environment we simply had a fee that we paid, because the revenues for stations in our class are never going to exceed a certain amount; it's just not possible. We represent less than 0.005% of the total radio market in Toronto, and we're probably near the top.
I think the artists should be compensated, but I think it's far simpler to pay them a fee. I would rather take that $32,000, add it to the $13,000, and write a cheque for $45,000, because then it goes to the artists. Right now, I'm administering all of that, and that fee doesn't even represent the hassle that it causes.
4:45 p.m.
Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC
Many parliamentarians aspire to be a minister, but I think the argument could be made for not wanting to be a minister when you see the variety of a market in which you have big, small, and tiny radio stations and you're supposed to regulate all of them.
Where would you say that the cut-off should be for such an exemption, where the big ones don't need to do this but should follow those systems? Or do you think it should be the same kind of system straight across the board, but maybe at different rates?
4:45 p.m.
General Manager, Radio Markham York Inc.
I think there should be degrees of this; I guess that would be the best way to put it. I think smaller stations that are serving multiple languages or multiple cultures fall into one class. The larger stations can afford it.
I think you need to understand the impact of this. I don't come here with solutions, in that sense, because I haven't done the full analysis. I've come here to share my experience and the experience of other stations, just to give you that.
4:45 p.m.
General Manager, Radio Markham York Inc.
But I think it's easy to analyze through the CRTC.
4:45 p.m.
Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC
I can appreciate that. It's just that as parliamentarians we also have to wrestle with where that line in the sand is, and then we pass it over to the minister, who then has to make that same deliberation with his or her officials, so I appreciate that.
Going back to the resale issue, I am quite concerned about competitiveness, but again, I also see that markets change in response to different things. You mentioned earlier, sir, Kijiji as being one source. Could your market change? Could people start looking to arrange their affairs in a different way?
I'll let you answer those first, but I do have one more question.
October 17th, 2018 / 4:50 p.m.
Director, Art Dealers Association of Canada
In the traditional gallery-auction house model, we're the intermediaries between the consumer and either the producer or the seller, in the case of resale. In other words, a gallery has an exhibition of an artist's work and people come in and buy it. If people are going to try to circumvent this because all of a sudden a seller of a work wants to net $10,000 but not $9,500 if it's subject to the ARR or whatever, so all of a sudden they want to net $10,750 or something like that....
All this is to say that if the seller is unwilling to pay that.... It is interesting to note that in Bill C-516 it was proposed that it should be the responsibility jointly and severally of the seller and the dealer. If the seller defaults on paying the ARR, all of a sudden people will come after the dealer to remit it on the seller's behalf. All of a sudden we're shouldering a tremendous burden. Sometimes a commission is as low as 10%. If we have to lose half of that because the seller reneged or whatever, it's hurtful.
My point is that for anyone trying to circumvent the model, it's fairly easy now, with the Internet, to just post it somewhere: here's_my_collection _for_sale.com. It's no longer at auction or in a retail gallery, but the seller can find the buyer easily enough. The two of them can get together to negotiate the price, which, as I said, will not include the ARR, and it will not include GST, HST or PST.
All these things will negatively impact.... The gallery model might disappear. Some artists will argue that this is great, but they might be forgetting that galleries do a lot to promote the art form and to promote their artists. We co-exist in a system that has worked pretty well for many years.
