Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Sure. I think it's fairly straightforward. The going in proposition for any independent producer or content creator is that we want to get our content into the hands of as many consumers as humanly possible. When we are looking at how we design TPMs and when and if we use them, t

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  To be very blunt, our preference would be that we not further expand the fair dealing provision in that way. However, we also recognize that this may be a matter, along with other aspects of the bill, that will be a matter of compromise. If the compromise is to retain that new ex

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  It absolutely is, yes. As difficult to quantify as it may be, there's no question about that.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Also on that point, that's why it's so critically important that we get the statutory damages part of the bill right, for that very reason: how difficult it in fact is, in any given circumstance, to quantify the damages that have been sustained by a producer or any content creato

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The secondary liability provisions are critically important because they will go a long way in shutting down certain services that we know are currently being provided here in this country that shouldn't be. By virtue of this bill, we would be provided with the mechanism we need

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I entirely agree with that, John. I think the five priorities you see articulated here are the ones we're primarily concerned about and that we need to see reflected in whatever the final bill looks like.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  They are. But what's very interesting, and I think it's important to underscore this, is that for certain business models and forms of content distribution for membership, they're absolutely integral and essential. There are other circumstances when our members won't use TPMs, pa

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Madame Lavallée indicated that we had seven asks. I am realizing that there are eight, actually.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Thank you. One thing that we think is very important in order to target commercial infringers is to ensure that the statutory damages provisions in place in the bill also apply to those who enable infringement. We want to make sure that those secondary liability provisions also

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Our concern is twofold, and we recognize that this is a very difficult issue. The first part is what that language would look like and whether it would, for all intents and purposes, eviscerate the TPM provisions in place. We looked at a variety of different options in that regar

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The basis of our industry, essentially, is that we divide the world into territories, and we license for a specific market. In those territories where the market has evaporated because we don't have the right frameworks in place for copyright, then the ability for the producer to

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  You're absolutely right; the proposal we put on the table here was developed in a spirit of compromise, if you will--namely, that if we're going to have an additional head under fair dealing for education, we feel that the minimum thing required is that there be clear definitiona

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Actually, you have covered it off pretty well with John.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Not yet.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  That's our intention.