I think article 11 is a problem. I think where we've seen that approach attempted in other jurisdictions, it doesn't work. There are a couple of European jurisdictions where it was attempted. The aggregators engaged in this simply stopped linking, and the publishers ultimately found that it hurt more than it helped.
I think we need to recognize that journalists rely on copyright and fair dealing in particular just as much as so many other players. The idea of restricting in favour of journalism really runs significant risks, given how important news reporting is.
I think it's also worth noting that I look at some of the groups that have come forward to talk about this. Some of them are the same groups that have licensed their work to educational institutions in perpetuity. To give you a perfect example, I know the publisher of the Winnipeg Free Press has been one of the people who have been outspoken on this issue. The University of Alberta has a great open access site about everything they license. They have quite literally licensed every issue of the Winnipeg Free Press in perpetuity for over a hundred years. In effect, the publishers sold the rights to be used in classrooms for research purposes, for a myriad of different purposes, on an ongoing basis.
With respect, it feels a bit rich for someone on the one hand to sell the rights through a licensing system and on the other hand ask, “How come we're not getting paid these extra ways and don't we need some sort of new copyright change?”