Post Tagged with: "canadian heritage"

Witness comparison by type - INDU vs. CHPC

Unbalanced Witness List: Why the Copyright Review Was Right To Ignore the Canadian Heritage Committee Study, Part Three

My series on why the Industry committee was right to ignore the Canadian Heritage committee study as part of the national copyright review has focused on process (the government vested sole responsibility with the Industry committee, its clear assertion as the authoritative copyright review, and an examination of the witness and brief list that confirms that Industry conducted a much more comprehensive consultation that overlapped with much of Heritage but also included hundreds of additional witnesses and briefs.

Read more ›

June 21, 2019 3 comments News
INDU release, https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/INDU/news-release/10581857

“Sole Responsibility” for the Copyright Review: Industry Committee Issues Unprecedented News Release Confirming It Was Right To Ignore the Canadian Heritage Committee Study

My series on why the Industry committee rightly chose to ignore the Canadian Heritage committee study on artist remuneration took an unexpected turn yesterday. Hours after I posted an analysis demonstrating that the Heritage committee had ignored its mandate by tabling its report in the House of Commons, the Industry committee issued an unprecedented news release confirming that it did not consider the Heritage report and that its report is the exclusive copyright review. The news release states:

Read more ›

June 19, 2019 7 comments News
Ignore by katie appleyard https://flic.kr/p/o9kVx (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Process Failure: Why the Copyright Review Was Right To Ignore the Canadian Heritage Committee Study, Part One

The release of the much-anticipated copyright review report from the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology has sparked a range of reactions. From UNEQ’s “the committee despises creators” to Canadian Music Publishers Association’s “disappointing“, some groups would clearly prefer that the government pay attention to the one-sided Canadian Heritage study instead. In fact, the report makes it clear that the committee did not read the Heritage study, as the committee thanked its colleagues and noted that it “looks forward to consulting their report.”

That approach angered Heritage committee member Pierre Nantel, who moved a motion that the committee “express its dismay” that its report was ignored. At this stage, it does not appear that the committee will consider Nantel’s motion as no further meetings are planned before the House of Commons breaks for the summer and then dissolves with the fall election.

Read more ›

June 18, 2019 Comments are Disabled News
Proper old school piracy! by Gary Denham (CC BY-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/8qqZcp

The “Bulte Report” Redux: Canadian Heritage Committee Releases Embarrassingly One-Sided Remuneration Models Study

The Canadian government announced its plans for a copyright review in December 2017, tasking the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology with the review. That report has been in the drafting stage for several months and is expected before the summer. In an effort to dampen concerns that Canadian Heritage would play a diminished role in the review, the responsible ministers asked the Industry committee to ask the Heritage committee to conduct a review on remuneration models for artists and creative industries. The formal request asked the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to “call upon the expertise of a broad range of stakeholders impacted by copyright to ensure a holistic understanding of the issues at play.”

Read more ›

May 15, 2019 13 comments News
Voices in the Park 2012 by Maurice Li Photography https://flic.kr/p/dcxotL (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Bryan Adams Warns Canadian Heritage Committee on Copyright Term Extension: Enriches Large Intermediaries, Not Creators

Canadian artist Bryan Adams captured headlines earlier this year when he appeared before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and urged reform to the reversion provision that seeks to remedy the bargaining imbalance between creators and music labels/publishers by reverting the rights many years later. Adams noted that creators never experience the benefit of reversion since it applies decades after their death. Instead, he proposed a 25 year reversion rule, which he argued was plenty of time for copyright to be exploited by an assignee.

Read more ›

December 21, 2018 9 comments News