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

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Are you talking about TPMs?

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

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

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

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  We can confirm that for our industry, but we don't really know how the record industry operates.

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 actually recoup that investment in the film is gone.

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 definitional parameters placed around education.

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 regard and we always came to the same conclusion, which is that in attempting to find that balance, the moment you begin to water down that provision, there are all kinds of opportunity for those who are not going to break the locks, purely for fair dealing purposes, to use it for purposes that none of us here want.

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 have statutory damages provisions supplied to them.

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, particularly when they're trying to promote a show and they want to use different vehicles of content distribution to do that.

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  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, the number one thing we are mindful of is this: how are we going to ensure that we get our content into the hands of as many consumers as possible?