Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Perhaps I could add something. There are two things I would add. There are other provisions in the act that may go against the grain of international conventions, not just the ones dealing with exceptions. Proposed section 30.04, on works made available on the Internet, or publ

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Well, I can actually give you examples of things I like in the bill.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  There are things that are positive in this bill. For instance, the fact that photographers are finally being treated like other authors--

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think that's an extremely important fact. I did my doctoral thesis on them, so this is an issue I know about. I think the enabling provisions in proposed subsections 27(2.2) and (2.3) are very important. Anything that affords greater moral rights to performers, as mandated by

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

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Yes, it seems to me. Lastly, it seems to me that the issues we're discussing about this bill aren't resolved. That's why we're all here. Because they haven't been resolved, they're creating a lot of uncertainty. They're also creating what is sometimes called a climate of discomfo

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 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