• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

House of Commons Debates VOLUME 146 Ï NUMBER 078 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 41st PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, February 10, 2012 Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) 5125 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, February 10, 2012 The House met at 10 a.m. That brings me to a second point made from both sides of the House during this debate. It is often amazing how much commonality we can find if we look for it among members on all sides. The second point is that we would not update our copyright Prayers laws simply because we want to keep abreast of our trading partners. We would also do it to send a clear message to artists and creators that we value their creativity and innovation. We want them to live GOVERNMENT ORDERS here, to work here, to invest here, to create here. We want their contributions to help make our Canada a great place to work, live Ï (1005) and raise a family. [English] COPYRIGHT MODERNIZATION ACT Another theme we have heard during this debate is the importance of finding the right balance when modernizing the Copyright Act for The House resumed from February 8 consideration of the motion the digital age. Anyone who is aware of this subject knows that that Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Copyright Act, be read the copyright law has to balance a great many interests. On the one second time and referred to a committee, and of the motion that this hand, consumers have a definite interest in being able to use different question be now put. platforms and media to enjoy the products they have purchased. Mr. Stephen Woodworth (Kitchener Centre, CPC): Mr. They want to be able to use art and music to enhance their own Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to speak at second reading creative efforts, for example, by adding soundtracks to their home of the much awaited, much anticipated and much needed Bill C-11, videos. Also, educators and researchers want to use material the copyright modernization act. available online in order to promote learning and to advance knowledge, noble goals. Since this Parliament convened last autumn, the House has had a wide-ranging debate on this bill. In fact, the debate began even before this Parliament convened. Hon. members are aware that the provisions to modernize the Copyright Act and bring it in line with These interests must, on the other hand, be balanced with those of the demands of the digital age were introduced in the last Parliament creators and artists who depend upon the financial rewards of their as Bill C-32. That bill died on the order paper, unfortunately, but not innovation. Creators have to be rewarded. They have a right to be before it had gone through second reading and had been discussed rewarded for their ideas and efforts. thoroughly at committee. Now we are in a new Parliament and some of the old discussion We must also encourage and reward those working in related has been renewed. We have scrutinized many of the provisions of the creative industries. Ideas do not just simply spring into life and get bill. We look forward to referring it to committee. distributed across the country on their own. In related creative industries from music and film to publishing and video gaming, all From listening to the debates, I have concluded that everyone on those people who invest heavily in creative products need to be both sides of the House agrees on several important points. The first compensated for their risks. Such stakeholders have a right to be is that we definitely need to modernize Canada's copyright laws. rewarded for their investment. They have a right to protect This is long overdue. themselves from those who want to take what they have helped Compared to our trading partners, Canada is late in updating our create but not pay for it. In fact, if they cannot protect themselves in copyright laws for the digital age. Members on both sides of the this fashion, they will lose motivation. House have referred to Canada's obligations as a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization. We are among over 80 countries that have signed the 1996 WIPO treaties, but we have not There is the challenge: to achieve a balance between the ability of yet implemented them. As a result, Canada's copyright law has Canadians to access and enjoy new technologies and the rights of simply not kept pace. This bill would bring Canada in line with our Canadian creators who contribute so much to our culture and G8 partners and most of the major economies of the OECD. economy. 5126 COMMONS DEBATES February 10, 2012 Government Orders Ï (1010) How can they talk about commonality? The member opposite says that he wants to protect artists, but 14,000 people—that is a lot of On the one hand, the bill would equip businesses with the legal people—signed a petition. They took the time to go to a website to framework to protect their intellectual property. Companies could express their concern about Quebec culture and Canadian culture. use digital locks as part of their business model and they would enjoy the protection of the law. However, at the same time the bill would legitimize the everyday activities of Canadians. It would How does he reconcile those two things? He says he is protecting make important exceptions for teachers and students to use new artists, but 14,000 people are worried. That is a lot of people. technologies to impart knowledge. The bill would encourage innovation and education by encouraging the use of leading-edge Mr. Stephen Woodworth: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the platforms and technologies by teachers and students across the member for his question. country. The bill would also provide fairness and balance in the penalties [English] available to enforce the law. The current legislation does not discriminate between violations for commercial purposes and I wish to remind him that, whether he or any individual likes it or violations for personal use. The bill before us would create two not, our duty as members of Parliament is to represent 34 million categories of infringement to which statutory damages could apply: Canadians. It is absolutely essential that we listen to the voices of commercial and non-commercial. every Canadian. However, at the end of the day it is our responsibility to ensure that the laws we pass are effective and Under the new bill, Canadians who are found in violation of the work well for Canadians across the board and not only for any one law for non-commercial purposes could be fined an amount ranging particular group or interest. anywhere from only $100 up to $5,000. On the other hand, the bill would give the courts sharp teeth when I want to mention a few specific instances where it would be dealing with the infringement of copyright for commercial purposes. possible under this bill to break into digital locks, which I know The courts then could impose fines up to $20,000 per infringement. concerns some of the people my colleague mentions. Those instances include law enforcement, national security activities, It is important that this message gets out across the country. reverse engineering for software compatibility, security testing of The bill before us seeks a careful balance between the interests of systems, encryption research, personal information protection, creators of copyrighted material and its consumers. Achieving this temporary recordings made by broadcast undertakings, access for balance is not easy. Previous Parliaments have tried to find the right persons with perceptual disabilities and unlocking wireless devices. balance, but bills have died on the order paper instead. These are all examples that perhaps people in the public at large are not aware of but they are very important for this bill. We hope that this time will be different and we can move ahead with a bill that would be good for both creators and consumers. The Ï (1015) bill benefits from the careful planning that went into Bill C-32. Hon. members will recall that before tabling that bill, the government Mr. Scott Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Wind- consulted widely with individual Canadians, interest groups and sor, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in regard to copyright and copyright reform, associations. As a result, Bill C-11 before us benefits from the input my colleague talks about achieving the perfect balance in this and the advice of many different points of view. particular situation, or at least the best balance that can be achieved. In many cases, the balance he is looking for does not exist because Now, some hon. members may debate that the balance tips too far we have the two extremes on either side. By way of illustration, to one side. Others may debate that it should go in the other people are allowed to download a piece of music. They can share it direction. The bill may not be perfect; however, it is very good. We within whatever method they use to listen to music, whether iPod or must not let the perfect become the enemy of the good by preventing MP3 and then onto a CD, for example. However at the same time, the bill from passing. I believe it has found the proper balance. I am digitally locked material is not allowed to be tampered with. So even looking forward to the bill proceeding to committee. though they have the right to share it, they cannot.

Load more

  94

Copy Link