Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My name is Ysolde Gendreau. I am a professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Montreal. However, I'm here today as president of ALAI Canada, which is the Canadian branch of the International Literary and Artistic Association, a body that wa

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Well, I am a member of the committee, so I let the committee look at aspects of technical matters. I concentrate on other matters where I can have technical input. I'm not here as a member of the IPIC committee; I'm here as a representative of ALAI, and ALAI is a body that has

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  As I understand it, I'm not sure there is such a need for a fair dealing purpose with respect to education. There are already other exceptions dealing with education, rather than fair dealing for the purpose of education itself.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I believe that's the conclusion I would like to come to with regard to those exemptions. It seems to me that exemptions of that kind will not meet the three-step test under the international treaties. Consequently, it is possible that Canada may find itself in an embarrassing sit

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I would very much fear that Canada would be brought before international authorities on the basis of the exemptions as they are currently drafted.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I wouldn't put the notion of levy for private copying in the same bag because this is not about an analysis based on a copyright exemption. In my view, compliance with international agreements should not be established on the basis of the three-step test. As for fair dealing for

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Yes.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Yes. However, if those works are "stolen", the authors are definitely not being compensated—

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Necessarily.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I believe I'm obliged to do so.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The exemptions and certain regimes provided for under the act mean that the power relationship between authors and disseminators, potentially public ones, is largely reversed.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  From that standpoint, yes, but allow me to tell you that the use of the word "balance" is a problem. Balance is a virtue; it is the image of justice. The problem is that that image leads to a zero sum game. In this situation, if either of the two parties wins, the other loses. Th

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think the Copyright Board decision was based on the concept of fair dealing for the purpose of research. In that perspective, I don't think we can assume that a similar approach, a similar outcome, would derive from an analysis based on fair dealing for the purpose of education

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think that anything to clarify the bill would always be welcome. But the issue you are raising is precisely one that shows the need for clarification. Within education, you also have the context of research. You do research when you do education; therefore, it makes sense tha

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I would agree. It's possible to adapt the act thanks to the case law. However, it needs to be modernized and updated. It's missing provisions. The treaties that are being implemented, such as the WIPO treaties, make it possible, in a way, to accommodate the new reality. Technolo