Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  We're talking, for example, about people who decide to make a family video with background music and then put it up on YouTube. Generally speaking, performers, at least those in the music industry, may eventually be in favour of this use. However, they'll wonder why no compensat

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  No, it's not enough.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  We're suggesting at least the "notice and withdrawal" system, or else a solution that would involve more Internet service providers, particularly in a financial way, perhaps.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Yes, it definitely has value. In particular, it vastly facilitates their broadcasting activities and, if it had no value, they wouldn't invest as much in technology in order to be able to do it, clearly.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  In fact, the Copyright Act makes it possible to establish a percentage, by regulation, if I'm not mistaken. I had the opportunity to testify on this subject when I appeared before the committee as president of the Canadian Private Copying Collective. It is possible to limit the a

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Part of the solution would definitely be to have an exemption in the private copying system for everything that can potentially be used to copy music, for all devices that are designed, created and marketed to make copies of musical works. That's one of the possible solutions. O

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  That's precisely the beauty of the innovative system we have in Canada. The Copyright Board of Canada is an economic regulatory body that ensures that the royalties charged are not unreasonable. It also ensures that the market suffers no harmful effects. To date, the Copyright B

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  The Copyright Act nevertheless needs to be improved, but not in the way proposed in Bill C-32. In the circumstances, it would be better to keep the present act rather than include the provisions of Bill C-32, which might cause utterly irreparable harm. One need only think of priv

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  It is. As it currently stands, it's preferable for Bill C-32 not to be adopted.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I'm going to let Mr. Legault answer.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Yes, absolutely, even just in the private copying system. Once people no longer use blank audio media, which are currently covered by the act, there will obviously be a dead loss in this area. Reproductions could be made without there being any financial compensation. The same i

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Indeed, an exemption is included in the act. Broadcasters do not have to pay royalties on the first $1.25 million of their advertising revenues. They only have to pay a lump sum amount of $100 in all. The president of Ré:Sonne would probably be in a better position than I am to

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a collective society that administers and distributes to performers who have taken part in a published sound recording royalties from fair compensation from the private copying and right of reproduction system, Artisti has a number of concerns with re