CNM Special Edition Update

Heritage committee sends Bill C-36 to third reading with only minor amendmentsOpponents of copyright term extensions were dealt a sudden blow today when the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage voted to accept Bill C-36 with only minor amendments, and including provisions to lengthen copyright protection for some deceased authors.In an extra-curricular meeting of the committee – Parliament is in summer recess – the understanding apparently reached between Liberal and Canadian Alliance members during a meeting June 13 was overturned as a raft of substitute members forced the issue of controversial sections 21 and 22 of the bill (CNM, June 13/03).Due to the summer recess, few members who were present at the June 13 meeting when Canadian Heritage Parliamentary secretary Carole-Marie Allard told the committee that the sections would be withdrawn were at today’s meeting. Of the substitute Liberals, Sarmite Bulte – the former Parliamentary secretary to Canadian Heritage minister Sheila Copps – was most vocal about retaining copyright term extensions in the bill. Previous meetings of the committee had heard vociferous opposition to copyright term extensions, with many arguing the back-door approach to Copyright Act legislation was unacceptable.Bulte and fellow Liberal Liza Frulla both expressed concern that, unless the copyright term extensions were made part of Bill C-36, the measure faced an uncertain future in the face of a December 31 deadline before the unpublished works of some deceased authors – including Lucy Maud Montgomery – were to fall into the public domain.The government faced opposition from its own members to adopting the measure as Mauril Bélanger stood firm to his position that an Act merging the National Library and National Archives was an inappropriate vehicle to change copyright law.Bélanger and other members, including Tory Gary Schellenberger, argued that their attendance was predicated on an unwritten agreement that the copyright term extensions would be dropped from the legislation. Allard confirmed that she had indicated as much to both members.Bulte, however, said she hadn’t been consulted on any deals and that she felt it important to keep the bill complete, including with the copyright term extensions.Each of the Liberal members present, including Larry Bagnell, Frulla, Guy St-Julien and John Godfrey, voted for the slightly-amended bill, with the exception of Bélanger who voted against and Allard who abstained. “I gave my word to several parties,” she said of the unexpected turn of events.Chuck Strahl, the Alliance’s regular attendee, had given notice on June 13 – apparently comfortable sections 21 and 22 would not be part of the approved bill – that he would not be present. Bloc Québécois member Jocelyne Girard-Bujold abruptly left the meeting minutes after arriving in town by air as several amendments she proposed to the bill were struck down in short order, leaving Schellenberger the only Opposition member in the room, his presence critical to maintaining quorum.Girard-Bujold’s displeasure could have been taken as an early sign that the copyright term extensions might be dropped. Her proposed amendments would have specified several classes of government records as being subject to mandatory deposit rules as she bid to increase the number of documents to which the public would have access. A majority of committee members, however, disapproved of the proposals, saying they were properly dealt with in the Access to Information and Privacy Act. The purpose of the day’s meeting, they emphasized, was to strip the bill down to only those elements required to effect the merger of the two institutions.The prevalent feeling disappeared, however, when consideration of sections 21 and 22 came up in clause-by-clause review, and Bulte referred to a letter read by committee chair Clifford Lincoln at the outset of the meeting from the Bureau of Canadian Archivists urging Parliamentarians to pass the bill intact since the copyright term extensions were the result of negotiations among stakeholders on all sides. Bulte opened the door to re-introducing the copyright term extensions when she said, “I’m concerned for the rightsholders…I’m feeling very uncomfortable about just taking this out and saying, ‘let’s see what happens in September.’”As chair Lincoln told the committee that a broad review of copyright couldn’t begin until September and would take several years to undertake, Bulte and Frulla became more adamant the bill be passed intact.Midway through the debate, Canadian Heritage counsel Jeff Richstone told the committee that the sections, as drafted, contained a technical flaw and it looked as though debate on the clauses would be delayed. But Heritage staff worked quickly to make minor changes to put section 21 in order and the clause was put to a vote and passed.The bill should now go before Parliament for a third and final reading in September, providing opponents to copyright term extensions some time to reverse the committee’s decision.Bélanger gave a preview of raucous times ahead as he told the committee that he would oppose the measures in the House of Commons. He summarized his feelings about the day after the meeting, telling Canadian NEW MEDIA, “You don’t amend the Copyright Act on the fly. You have to amend it in a comprehensive way, which is not what this committee just did.”

CNM Special Edition Update

News | 06/17/2003 4:00 am EDT

Heritage committee sends Bill C-36 to third reading with only minor amendments

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us