Evidence of meeting #141 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 authors.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Then this committee would be successful if we were to actually recommend something that's much simpler.
4:45 p.m.
Director, Art School, Université Laval, As an Individual
Yes, and remember that CCH is about lawyers not wanting to pay for photocopies. It's not about creative fair use or fair dealing, so that's one thing.
If you want to rewrite the Copyright Act, the test would be to give it to a second-year student in a law faculty just to see what they understand.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Thanks. I appreciate that.
I have to cut you off because I have to get my next question in to Mr. Katz.
You talked in your testimony about cases where Access Copyright was infringing on the copyrights of people. Can you tell me about some of those cases?
4:45 p.m.
Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Do you mean decided cases?
4:45 p.m.
Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual
No. They have been doing that. They still do that. They authorize the use of works that aren't theirs.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I have evidence that they do that, and in my opinion, this constitutes copyright infringement. The Copyright Board agreed that—
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Are there any copyright holders who are saying Access Copyright is stealing their information?
4:50 p.m.
Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I'm a copyright holder. Some of my works are used by Access Copyright. They are happy to license them, and they don't have the right to do that.
4:50 p.m.
Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Also, they're happy to collect money for that.
4:50 p.m.
Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Can I sue them? I may have other things to do with my life.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
I think we all do.
I have only 20 seconds left, and I see Mr. Sookman is asking to comment.
4:50 p.m.
Partner with McCarthy Tétrault and Adjunct Professor, Intellectual Property Law, Osgoode Hall Law School, As an Individual
In that 20 seconds, I'll comment that Access Copyright has had numerous tariffs certified by the board. Their repertoire has been challenged. It is simply nonsense to assert that they don't have rights to license.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Thank you very much.
I'll take my three seconds to say thank you to all the witnesses. It's much appreciated.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you for managing your time.
We're going to move to Mrs. Caesar-Chavannes for five minutes.
4:50 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Thank you very much.
Thank you to all the witnesses.
To the Canadian Bar Association, if I'm reading this correctly, your recommendation is to consider implementation of the notice-and-takedown system. In the written statement you've provided, you say that neither system, notice and notice or notice and takedown, is perfect. You go on to say that “a notice-and-takedown regime can result in Internet service providers removing content following an allegation, without evidence or warning to the alleged infringer.”
Why are you recommending notice and takedown, and not to improve the effectiveness of notice and notice to redress online infringement?
4:50 p.m.
Executive Officer, Intellectual Property Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
That's an interesting question. I would turn it back to you and say, what do you mean by improving the effectiveness of notice and notice?
Are you proposing something such as I heard in a comment earlier, that the international treaties govern what we can do with people who are posting or infringing copyright from overseas? I don't know of an international treaty that lets me enforce against somebody who is overseas, so I don't know where you're going in terms of improving the notice-and-notice system.
4:50 p.m.
Executive Officer, Intellectual Property Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
It's an interesting question, but when it comes to that, yes, we acknowledge that neither system is perfect. You're never going to find a perfect system. You're always striving for perfection.
The more effective system of the two is going to be notice and takedown, because it gives the rights holders the strongest protection they can have against the use of infringing content online, and potentially problematic infringing content online.
4:50 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
You also talk about the anti-counterfeiting section. You recommend that simplified procedures be adopted to permit the relinquishment of uncontested counterfeits, and that the importer, in a failure to respond to any accusations against them, be required to relinquish the detained counterfeits, or the CBSA has to relinquish the detained counterfeit to the rights holder.
Can you explain a bit further what you would like to see happen with that particular recommendation?
4:50 p.m.
Executive Officer, Intellectual Property Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
It's kind of like what Mr. Sookman was talking about with the site blocking. It's more of an administrative regime. There is an ability for somebody at the Canada Border Services Agency to accept an affidavit or a statutory declaration from a copyright owner or a rights holder or a brand owner saying that these are counterfeit goods.
Then you go back to the importer. If they say nothing or if they admit that these are counterfeit—I'm talking about uncontested goods here—there is an opportunity to seize or destroy the goods right away, without any further action required, without having to go to the courts.
That is an administrative process that prevents an extra burden on our judicial system.
4:50 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Thank you.
Mr. Katz, I want to go back to a submission that was made on behalf of the Canadian intellectual property law scholars, of which you were a signatory. One of the recommendations was on open access to scientific publications.
Are researchers amenable to that recommendation? Does the research community writ large want that to be part of a copyright regime?