Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  You do realize that that's basically a quote directly from the Supreme Court of Canada CCH case, that that's where it's drawn from?

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  What it's saying is that...it lists some factors about whether something is fair or isn't fair, and the economic impact of the dealing is one of those factors. That's not controversial. That's the Supreme Court of Canada. If you're suggesting that we are trying to find ways--

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I'll try to be quick in my answer. The United States has a robust publishing industry. It has an incredible content or entertainment industry, probably the strongest in the world. It has educational fair dealing. The U.S. copyright law says that you may fair deal for purposes “s

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Yes, I can quickly speak to that. The TPM or digital lock provisions in Bill C-32 stand out strangely as really containing no balance whatsoever. What it will mean is essentially the end of fair dealing, the end of a fundamental right enshrined in the Copyright Act, in any kind

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think the drafters of the bill are to be congratulated for recognizing a real need here. I also know that the drafters are trying to find ways to balance out different concerns. In this case, the requirement to destroy material shortly after it has been delivered simply doesn

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I can start by reminding you of some figures; I don't know whether you missed them in our presentation or the other presentations. CARL--this is not my Uncle Carl, this is the Canadian Association of Research Libraries--estimates that the annual expenditure by the library sector

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  You were asking if copying a work could have a negative impact...?

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Certainly one of the fairness tests is the economic impact on the owner. Anything that didn't meet the fairness test would not meet the educational use of fair dealing. In terms of the licence, I guess that's a different issue. Universities license all kinds of things. They pay

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  It's not the source of the work that determines whether something is being dealt with fairly or not. It's the test elucidated by the Supreme Court decision and by the Copyright Act as it currently stands.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The Copyright Act itself doesn't define fair dealing. It sets out purposes. The actual test has been set out by the courts, particularly the Supreme Court in the CCH decision.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The will of Parliament and the way the courts have unfolded has made it a matter of the exercise of good judgment on behalf of Canadians to—

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Perhaps you could clarify your question, please.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the notion of rights in the Copyright Act. The Copyright Act gives rights to copyright owners. It also gives rights to copyright users. So in the sense that...is it the right of copyright owners and users to take matters to the