ACTRA Presentation
House of Commons Legislative Committee on Bill C-32
Ferne Downey, ACTRA National President
Stephen Waddell, ACTRA National Executive Director
8 February, 2011
Thank you. Mr. Chair and Committee Members, My name is Ferne Downey. I’m a professional actor and the President of ACTRA. With me today is Stephen Waddell, ACTRA’s National Executive Director.
We support the goal of this bill to make it easier for Canadians to use technology to access content anywhere, anytime.
We also applaud the efforts that this bill takes to adopt international standards to fight content theft.
However, a good bill must do more than fight-off those who feel entitled to something for nothing; it must also protect the right of creators to be compensated for the legitimate use of their work.
Unlike many Canadians, creators don’t get a paycheque from a single employer. We might earn one paycheque here and another one over here. It’s only when you add them together that we are able to make our mortgage payment and put food on the table.
Bill C-32 threatens to wipe out many of these small but crucial revenue streams. It is nothing less than a full-scale attack on collective licensing by introducing a multitude of exceptions that weaken copyright.
As you heard from the Canadian Conference of the Arts last week, this Bill puts at risk $126 million in annual revenues that creators and rightsholders currently earn under collective licences. And this loss is on top of what we’ve already lost to piracy.
Killing collective licensing is neither modern, nor balanced. In a digital world, rights-holder-run societies are the only realistic way to provide practical access to users and reasonable compensation to creators. In short, this Bill moves us backwards.
We have identified six specific areas where the Bill must be amended.
Number One: User-Generated Content
It is peculiar that the Government would in one part of the Bill give performers long-needed moral rights, in keeping with international standards, and then on the next page take them all away with a poorly conceived `mash-up’ provision that lets users take an artists’ content and do whatever they want with it.
No other country in the world has a law like this, why is Canada trying to be a world leader in stripping creators of their rights? This clause must be significantly amended or removed from the Bill entirely.
(STEPHEN WADDELL)
Number Two: Expansion of Fair Dealing and New Exceptions
This sweeping exception will take millions out of creators’ pockets and could devastate our educational publishing industry.
Most puzzling is that this destructive provision proposes to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. Educators have access to the materials they need for a nominal fee through collective licensing.
C-32 must be amended to meet the internationally accepted method of determining what exceptions in copyright law are fair – the Berne Three Step test.
It prescribes that exceptions…
1) are confined to certain special cases
2) do not conflict with a normal exploitation of a work
3) do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or performer.
Number Three: Statutory Damages
Why does C-32 give illegal file-sharing sites that help people around the world share stolen music and movies, a free ride by exempting them from statutory damages? This loophole must be closed.
Statutory damages must be proportionate, but there is no need to make a distinction between commercial and non-commercial infringement. Non-commercial infringement damages rightholders too.
Number 4: ISP Liability
If you really want to stop content theft then you need to give Internet Service Providers the tools they need to deal with people who continually break the law.
We need to discourage repeated acts of infringement with escalating consequences.
Number Five: Elimination of the Broadcast Mechanical Licence
This is yet another attack on collective licensing. By removing this provision you take money directly out of the pockets of artists and creators and put it back in the already overflowing wallets of private broadcasters.
(FERNE DOWNEY)
Number Six: Reproduction for Private Purposes
Compensation must be attached to format shifting and reproduction for private purposes so that income can continue to flow to artists regardless of how media develops.
The existing private copying levy must be modernized so that it applies to digital devices developed, manufactured and marketed to copy music. If it is not updated it will take millions of dollars of royalties out of artists’ pockets.
Let’s be frank. The private copying levy is not new. It is not going to apply to cars. It is not $75. And, it is not a tax. The only tax on iPods is the HST. We ask you to put rhetoric aside and do the right thing. And everyone in this room knows that updating the levy instead of letting it die a natural death is the right thing to do.
At some point – whenever it is – you will all be fighting for your jobs. And you are all aware that there are nearly a million creators working together to get this Bill fixed. Our reach extends to every riding in this country.
We are particularly counting on the three opposition parties to work together to fix this bill. Together you hold the majority on this committee and in this House. We need you to deliver a Bill that recognizes the central role that creators and rights-holders have in our digital economy and assures them that their intellectual property rights will be respected.
Anything less and Canada will continue to be an international embarrassment, to our collective shame.
Thank you.
