My recent series reviewing the Industry Committee’s copyright review (process, evidence, witness balance, citation) was about more that just why the decision to ignore the Canadian Heritage committee study on artist remuneration was justified. The series provides a data-backed assessment of the quality of the consultation of the respective committees, which is inextricably linked to their final recommendations. The better process is important because when comparing the recommendations from the two committees, the Industry committee consistently provided deeper analysis even in areas where there was agreement. The better analysis is not a coincidence: better process generates better policy and the Industry committee engaged in broader consultations in which it heard both from more creators and more users than Heritage.
Post Tagged with: "value gap"
Better Data, Better Results: Comparing the Gap Between the Copyright Review and Heritage Study on the Music Industry’s Policy Proposals
Canada’s Internet Music Success Story: SOCAN’s Canadian Internet Streaming Revenues Surpass Radio Royalties
While the music industry continues to focus on a so-called “value gap” that does not reflect the state of Canadian law, mounting data also suggests that it does not provide an accurate depiction of the revenues being generated in Canada today from Internet streaming. SOCAN, Canada’s largest music copyright collective, last week reported preliminary numbers for 2018, with the data indicating that Internet streaming revenues have now hit $62 million, likely surpassing both radio and television royalties as its second largest source of domestic revenues. In fact, Internet streaming now accounts for 22 per cent of SOCAN’s domestic revenues and will almost certainly become its largest domestic revenue source in 2019.
Copyright and Culture: My Submission to the Canadian Heritage Committee Study on Remuneration Models for Artists and Creative Industries
The Canadian Heritage committee study on remuneration models for artists and creative industries, which was launched to support the Industry committee’s copyright review, wrapped up earlier this month. I appeared before the committee in late November, where I focused on recent allegations regarding educational copying practices, reconciled the increased spending on licensing with claims of reduced revenues, and concluded by providing the committee with some recommendations for action. My formal submission to the committee has yet to be posted (the committee has been slow in posting submissions), but it expanded on that presentation by focusing first on the state of piracy in Canada, followed by an examination of three sectors: (i) educational copying; (ii) the music industry and the value gap; and (iii) film and television production in Canada. The full submission can be found here.
Earlier this week, I submitted my copyright review brief to the Industry Committee. The brief tracks my opening comments to the committee closely, focusing on the data arising from five issues: educational copying, site blocking, the so-called value gap, the impact of the copyright provisions of the CUSMA, and potential reforms in support of Canada’s innovation strategy. Due to a 2,000 word limit, the committee version will be a slightly condensed version of my original. I’ve posted both online (original version, submitted version).
With the Industry committee’s copyright review winding down, I appeared yesterday before the committee to discuss the state of Canadian copyright. The wide ranging two hour discussion focused on everything from fair dealing to crown copyright to concerns that publishers don’t fairly compensate authors for their digital licensing revenues. My opening statement placed the spotlight on five issues: educational copying, site blocking, the so-called value gap, the impact of the copyright provisions of the CUSMA, and potential reforms in support of Canada’s innovation strategy. An audio version and transcript of the opening statement is posted below.