Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 2708
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I would like to thank the Council of Ministers of Education for the very complete documentation they have been sending us over the course of the past year. We've certainly received a great deal of material. Many of your positions, if you like, are quite clear and well known.
You talked about the need to perhaps define more clearly what is meant by “education”, and you brought up the fact that it should specifically include teachers making copies for their students. Is it possible to ask your organization to provide us with what they would consider to be a proper and full definition—perhaps taking into account the legal aspects of it—of what they consider to be the education exemption? Is it possible for all of you to put your heads together and send us something you would consider to be an adequate definition? Is that a request we can make to you?
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Okay. That obviously adds some definition to it, but it would be useful for us as legislators to understand it more fully.
I think there has been a general consensus that we want to provide some definition to the term “education” because it can be interpreted in different manners by different groups. Obviously with you being a minister of education and working with others, it would be very useful for us to have what you would consider to be a definition of education. That would be much appreciated.
On a different subject, do you see this bill, if it passes the way it is written, having any implications, from a budgetary point of view, for the ministries of education of the provinces and territories?
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you.
You have focused, for obvious reasons, on education. Do you have opinions on other parts of the bill that are of interest to us as legislators--for example the issue of digital locks, the issue of statutory damages, and those kinds of things? Are there opinions you want to express to this group this morning on those things?
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Okay. I think you line up with the vast majority of witnesses we have heard on this subject. In other words, the issue of copying for non-infringing purposes for personal use is something the bill should contain, which it doesn't at the moment. As the bill is currently written, any circumvention of a digital lock is considered an illegal activity.
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
On the other side of the coin, on the main point you brought up today, of course we have also heard from many writers and those who produce materials—not just writers, but those who produce materials that are used in the educational field—and some of them feel this bill will prevent them from having access to payments for their works that they consider to be due to them. Now, you have made the case that you don't believe this is the situation. Can you expand a little bit as to why you feel they will not be shortchanged by this legislation as it's proposed?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Yes, I'll try to.
First of all, I have to say that it's a bit sad to see that Mr. Fast took some time at this important committee to make some partisan comments.
If I wanted to make some partisan comments, I would remind him that in 2005 we had a very good bill that was brought down when the coalition, the NDP-Bloc-Conservative coalition, brought down the government.
If I wanted to be partisan, I would also remind him that there was another bill in 2008, and that died because the Conservative government called an election.
If I were partisan, I would remind him that it's been two-and-something years now that they were elected--including prorogation, of course; we have to remind them of that.
If this has been delayed, it's certainly not been because of the Liberal Party, Mr. Chair. You know that very well.
I'll now turn to our guests.
Good morning.
Thank you for being here with us today.
What connection is there between you and Access Copyright?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
From what I understand, you are involved in a major court case against Access Copyright. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that you had a disagreement regarding fees applicable to students. The Copyright Commission dealt with the case and ruled in favour of a new fee with which you disagreed. You took the case to court, and I believe that Access Copyright won and maintained the fee. My understanding is that you want to take the case to the Supreme Court. Is that correct?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
I am sorry to interrupt you, but I have only five minutes.
What happens to the money that is collected in the meantime? What happens to the money that has to be collected for copies while the court proceedings continue? Is it redistributed to the authors?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Can Access Copyright distribute the money, or does it need to keep it until the matter is settled in court?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
If I understand correctly, this situation penalizes authors, since the money has to be kept aside for the time being, given that you have launched another appeal.
I have to stop there, because I promised my colleague I would leave him some time.
View Dan McTeague Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm going to continue with the answer to the question.
Thank you for being here.
Your current appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal, which found that the tariff, the rate, was in fact correct, has led you to talk about more than just money. You've said that this is not about money. Your appeal suggests that the current law of interpretation of fair dealing is “confusing and unclear”.
Am I to take it that the six-step test of the Supreme Court of Canada in CCH is not acceptable? Are you looking for something free here that you wouldn't otherwise get, say, in snow-plowing contracts or looking for free computers? I'm confused by the position taken by your organization. It sounds to me that you would prefer to obtain things for free that would otherwise respect some of the property rights that Mr. Fast alluded to earlier.
View Dan McTeague Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm sorry to interrupt you, because we probably just have seconds.
Are the factors enumerated in CCH sufficient? You're looking for fairness here, but it seems to me it's already well defined. Are you quibbling with that decision? If you are not quibbling with that decision, I'm trying to find out why you're appealing a decision with the Federal Court of Appeal.
View Dan McTeague Profile
Lib. (ON)
So you say there's no clarity, that CCH does not provide you the clarity you're looking for.
Results: 1 - 15 of 2708 | Page: 1 of 181

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data