Question Period Note: Modernization of the Copyright Act

The Parliamentary review of the Copyright Act was launched in March 2018 under the leadership of the Standing Committee of Industry, Science and Technology. To support the review, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage conducted a study on remuneration models for artists and creative industries.

• We would like to thank the members of the Industry, Science and Technology Committee in the last Parliament for their review of the Copyright Act and their report.
• We would equally like to thank the members of the Heritage Committee in the last Parliament for their work on remuneration models for artists and creative industries and their report entitled Shifting Paradigms.
• The Government has been reviewing these recommendations, and will continue to do so with a view to ensuring that Canada has a healthy copyright marketplace in which creators and rights holders can reap the full rewards of their work and investments in Canada’s creative marketplace, and where Canadians have access to a variety of content.

Parliamentary Review of the Copyright Act
• The Parliamentary review of the Copyright Act (Act) was launched in March 2018 under the leadership of the Standing Committee of Industry, Science and Technology (INDU). To support the review, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage (CHPC) conducted a study on remuneration models for artists and creative industries.
• Both committees concluded their studies in January 2019.
• INDU heard from 209 witnesses, held 42 meetings, and received 192 briefs and over 6,000 emails. CHPC heard from 115 witnesses, held 19 meetings, and received 75 briefs.
• On May 15, 2019, CHPC tabled its report in the House of Commons on Remuneration Models for Artists and Creative Industries entitled, Shifting Paradigms.
• On June 3, 2019, INDU also presented its report in the House entitled Statutory Review of the Copyright Act.
CHPC Report
• In its report, CHPC identified 5 major recurrent themes:
o Increasing value gap;
o Decline in the artistic middle class;
o Impact of technology on creative industries;
o Change in consumer culture; and
o Indigenous perspective on copyright.
• It also identified and categorized challenges and possible solutions by creative industries.
• The Report contains twenty-two recommendations and a short complementary report written by former MP Pierre Nantel from the New Democratic Party.
• Some recommendations are very broad (e.g., that the Government of Canada increase its support to creators and creative industries in adapting to new digital markets) and others very specific (e.g., that the exception for charitable organizations in subsection 32.2(3) of the Copyright Act be clarified to apply strictly to activities where no commercial monetary gain is intended).
• The Report does not contain any request for a government response. Instead, CHPC adopted a non-binding motion on May 2, 2019, requesting that the Government table a comprehensive response to the report, without giving any specific instructions on timeline, format or mechanism by which the Government should present its response.
INDU Report
• In its report, the Committee identified the six following themes: Statutory Review; Indigenous matters; Rights; Exceptions; Enforcement; and Collective administration of rights.
• The report makes 36 specific recommendations. It also contains a short supplementary report by the New Democratic Party and a dissenting report from the Conservative Party.
• Some recommendations are very broad (e.g., that the Government of Canada simplify the wording and structure of the Copyright Act), others are very specific (e.g., that the Government of Canada provide creators a non-assignable right to terminate any transfer of an exclusive right no earlier than 25 years after execution of the transfer), and some call for more study and reporting back to the Committee at a later time (e.g., that the Government of Canada consult and explore the costs and benefits of implementing a nation artist’s resale right and report back within three years).
• Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee requested that the Government present a comprehensive response. However, the prescribed 120-day period that the Government has to respond to committee reports extended into the writ period in September 2019. Tabling a comprehensive response was not feasible before Parliament was dissolved.
• Both the request by CHPC and INDU for Government responses died with the dissolution of the previous Parliament.

None