CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 139 Ï NUMBER 006 Ï 3rd SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, February 9, 2004 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 285 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, February 9, 2004 The House met at 11 a.m. signals broadcast by satellite. They then sell this illegal equipment to consumers who are thus able to get satellite television free of charge. [English] Prayers I have heard some suggest that this is a victimless crime, that stealing from big, faceless companies is somehow much more GOVERNMENT ORDERS acceptable in our society than stealing from our neighbours. Ï (1100) Let me assure the House that this is not a victimless crime. The [Translation] theft of the satellite signals denies legitimate Canadian broadcasters, content producers and programmers millions of dollars a year. It robs RADIOCOMMUNICATION ACT money from an industry that supports thousands of jobs. It is not Bill C-2—On the Order: Government Orders only morally and ethically wrong, it is illegal. February 5, 2004—The Minister of Industry—Second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology of Bill C-2, an act to amend the Radiocommunication Act. Such actions contravene the Radiocommunication Act. In fact, a Supreme Court decision in April 2002 determined that the Hon. Lucienne Robillard (Minister of Industry and Minister unauthorized recording of any encrypted subscription programming responsible for the Economic Development Agency of Canada signal is illegal, no matter where it originates. for the Regions of Quebec, Lib.) moved that Bill C-2, an act to amend the Radiocommunication Act, be immediately Ï (1110) referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. [Translation] She said: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House this morning to introduce what I believe is an important piece of Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the current legislation, both for the broadcasting sector and for the Canadian legislation is simply inadequate for resolving the growing number of consumer. problems are we face. Law enforcement officials and broadcasters do The government has made the creation of a 21st century economy not have the tools necessary to dissuade criminals who import, one of its highest priorities for Canadians. This commitment design and sell illegal technical devices. The purpose of this bill is to emphasizes ensuring that the commercial context in this country is correct this situation. favourable, that is, that it fosters the entrepreneurial spirit and rewards ingenuity and diligent work. Let me note right away that the government does not intend to target every home in Canada. We must put an end to pirating, but we Ï (1105) will not succeed in doing so by filing lawsuits against the average Among other things, this means that the market regulation citizen. We must instead target the businesses that make large profits framework must protect intellectual property. This means having from the sale of illegal material. regulations that encourage risk-taking and support innovation. It also means having legislation that contributes to fair competition and Make no mistake, satellite signal piracy is a very lucrative, black penalizes—as it should—those who profit unduly from the labour market activity in Canada. The broadcasting industry estimates that and entrepreneurial spirit of other people. between 500,000 and 700,000 people in Canada receive unauthor- ized direct-to-home broadcasting services. Studies by the industry This legislation deals with all those factors. The bill before us show that such activities result in the loss of some $400 million a deals with the growing problem of pirated direct broadcast satellite year in subscription revenue. signals, and is intended to strengthen our ability to protect one of our most important cultural sectors. This is a substantial sum of money, especially given the enormous I am sure that most of the members of this House are aware of this investment required by this relatively new, direct satellite broad- illegal technique. Briefly, people engaged in this illicit business casting. This industry also relies on innovation and new satellite import and build equipment that can be used to decode program technologies. 286 COMMONS DEBATES February 9, 2004 Government Orders Some of the capital intensive investments are made to constantly with licensed radiocommunication systems of emergency and police improve security measures. For instance, direct-to-home companies services. This alone requires that the necessary measures be taken. regularly use electronic countermeasures. In other words, they send signals on their system to scramble or deactivate pirated receivers. Ï (1115) The industry is responsible for keeping security measures up to date. It is a responsibility they take seriously. For companies in this [English] industry to get a return on their investment, they need a fair market. [English] I realize that some fears persist. During earlier discussions on this issue, members of the House raised concern about programming The bill proposes to discourage satellite piracy in three ways. content and the need to broaden the material available on Canadian First, we want to make it more difficult to obtain the hardware airways. This is a very interesting and important discussion that required to steal a satellite signal. The bill would give the Canada needs to take place; however, it is a subject for a different debate. We Border Services Agency an important tool to accomplish this. cannot allow ourselves to be distracted from the real issues here. This is satellite piracy. Although the Radiocommunication Act prohibits the importation of illegal receivers, equipment continues to flow across the border. We are not talking about limiting choices for Canadian consumers. Customs officials have told us that it is difficult for them to We are talking about preventing the erosion of Canada's broad- determine which imported equipment may be used for illegal casting system by stopping activities that are clearly illegal. purposes and which will not. The bill provides for better control at the border by requiring an [Translation] import certificate issued by the Minister of Industry for anyone wishing to bring satellite signal decoding equipment in to Canada. We do not want to target Canadians who watch television, but Second, the bill would increase the penalties prescribed in the act rather those individuals who profit from pirated signals. to a level that would provide a meaningful deterrent to that piracy. There are penalties under sections 9 and 10 of the current act but dealers clearly do not find these penalties to be daunting. In fact, This bill reinforces existing legislation in Canada. It has received increasingly they see them as an acceptable cost of doing business broad support from all the stakeholders in Canadian broadcasting, as and factor them into their business planning. well as officials responsible for law enforcement and customs services. It will also ensure a fair chance for Canada's cultural sector If we are going to allocate law enforcement resources to address and guarantee sustainable competition in broadcasting, which will this issue, and the government believes we should since this clearly benefit Canadian consumers. as criminal activity, we need to make sure that prosecution will in fact deter piracy. The punishment needs to fit the crime. We need to For these reasons, I encourage members of this House to join me send a stronger message, both to industry and the courts, that in supporting this bill. Parliament regards signal piracy as a serious offence. The new penalties proposed in the legislation will do just that. [English] [Translation] Finally, this bill reinforces the right to pursue civil remedies in Mr. James Rajotte (Edmonton Southwest, CPC): Mr. Speaker, court. It provides the broadcasting industry with the tools it needs to I am disappointed with the way that the government is bringing best defend its interests. This industry has attempted to slow the forward this legislation. This received less than one day of debate as growth in pirated satellite services by launching civil proceedings Bill C-52 in its original form and now it is being pushed through to against the main resellers in Canada, but such recourse is both second reading in less than half a day. expensive and ineffective. It is difficult to prove the causal link between an illegal act and the This is a complex subject. I think even the government would extent of actual losses suffered by the broadcasting industry. This bill agree. We should have many days of debate before we push it on to allows this industry to recover damages stipulated in the act instead committee. of having to prove actual losses. Under this bill, victims of commercial pirating will be able to Bill C-2, an act to amend the Radiocommunication Act, serves to claim legal damages of up to $100,000. This will compensate for the increase the penalties and provide for civil remedies against those theft of their intellectual property and discourage illegal activity. individuals and corporations who sell and use illegal radiocommu- nications equipment, specifically satellite television dishes to receive I must add that, in addition to measures to stop the theft of satellite signals from satellite television program providers who are not signals, this bill also includes measures on public safety. The use of licensed by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications pirated receiver cards has been found to create signal interference Commission. February 9, 2004 COMMONS DEBATES 287 Government Orders The CRTC currently licenses two suppliers to provide direct to I understand that large shipments of dishes frequently cross the home satellite television services to Canadians: Bell ExpressVu, border for resale in Canada.