Please reply to this article with any comments you may have about the Bill C-32 Clause-by-clause notes I authored. My intention is to keep that document updated with whatever feedback I receive.
With regard to clause 33, I read that as saying only that exempt media, as recognized by the CRTC, may qualify for the broadcast undertaking exemption, rather than that the CRTC has any say as to the content of the exception.
"33. The portion of subsection 30.8(11) of the Act after paragraph (c) is replaced by the following:
The undertaking must hold a broadcasting licence issued by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission under the Broadcasting Act, or be exempted from this requirement by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission."
The new part is the part in italics here, which was underlined in the bill. The existing 30.8 is all about an exception to copyright for Ephemeral Recordings. Section 30.8(11) is "Definition of “programming undertaking”".
We may want to ask for clarification on this. The "or be exempted from this requirement" by the CRTC seems like the CRTC is able to exempt a "programming undertaking" from the other limits to the exception that exists within 30.8(11), such as holding a broadcast license.
Grammatically, "this requirement" would seem to refer back to "must hold a broadcasting license." That is, the conditions for eligibility for the broadcasting undertaking exception are: 1) hold a broadcasting license, or 2) be exempt from the requirement to hold a broadcasting license. In each case, the CRTC makes the determination with respect to eligibility, but that's it.
I can't see any harm in asking for a clarification, but it seems straightforward to me.
I am still not convinced we interpreted the language of the bill differently. I think where we may have a problem is that my comment was poorly written.
Old:
"Not sure, but does this allow the CRTC to authorize exemptions for unlicensed new media? (See discussion on blogspot)"
How about:
"This allows the Ephemeral Recordings exemption to apply to entities that hold a broadcasting license, as well as allowing the CRTC to exempt additional entities that don't have a broadcast license. This additional flexibility will hopefully be used by the CRTC to enable this exemption for new media which, being unlicensed, were ineligible for similar exemptions."
I spent the morning being reminded of the importance of public service. I first met Mauril Bélanger in 1996 the context of the Defence Fund for the Montreal Rally (Rally during the Quebec referendum of 1995), and SOS Montfort . When I moved into his riding in 1997 I wrote him a letter . This was a point of transition in my life. I wasn't involved in politics until the early 1990's, and at first all I saw in government was corruption. I was very much at what I now call my "smash the state" phase where I felt the whole lot of current politicians needed to go. Mauril was someone who gave me a different impression, of someone who even from within government was visibly trying to do the right thing. While he knew I didn't vote for him or his party, he still listened to me and offered feedback and help. This continued each time we met, where he was always extremely friendly and gave helpful advise on how to move forward on th...
I turned 50 at the end of March. I was very reflective around that time, starting to think about a future that might include retirement and pondering if I was currently where I wanted to be. Adjusting to my new employer starting in April hasn't always been easy, as I continue to struggle with different ideas about where priorities should be when time is limited. Over the years at Canadiana several projects were started without clear plans for completion or ongoing maintenance, and technological debt has built up. Early in April my mother had a heart attack. Her birthday was April 14'th, and we didn't know if family was getting together for a birthday or a funeral. When she managed to survive she was told she only had weeks or months to live - that it was unlikely she would see another Christmas. My mother's health has been declining for years, and life became harder for her after my father's death in 2009 . Decembers had already been particularly hard ...
While I am not a fan of Bell as a company or their harmful politics, I decided to give CraveTV as a technology a quick look given they un-tied it to their BDU and Internet services since I wrote about it in January . Technology The service works on few devices, nowhere near what is available for Netflix. While their site listed Samsung SmartTV, the model I have appears to be too old for their immature app. This makes it unlikely my wife will be interested in watching video on CraveTV as she finds the other options far less convenient than just using the remote control that came with the TV -- there is so much from Netflix, YouTube, and Ted Talks that all work great on the SmartTV option to bother looking elsewhere. My first successful try with CraveTV was with what I would most often be using, which is my Chromebook and Chromecast devices. The website was sufficient, but not inspiring. Their "My cravings" menu allowed you to play the next video in a series, but using that i...
With regard to clause 33, I read that as saying only that exempt media, as recognized by the CRTC, may qualify for the broadcast undertaking exemption, rather than that the CRTC has any say as to the content of the exception.
ReplyDeleteThe clause reads as follows:
ReplyDelete"33. The portion of subsection 30.8(11) of the Act after paragraph (c) is replaced by the following:
The undertaking must hold a broadcasting licence issued by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission under the Broadcasting Act, or be exempted from this requirement by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission."
The new part is the part in italics here, which was underlined in the bill. The existing 30.8 is all about an exception to copyright for Ephemeral Recordings. Section 30.8(11) is "Definition of “programming undertaking”".
We may want to ask for clarification on this. The "or be exempted from this requirement" by the CRTC seems like the CRTC is able to exempt a "programming undertaking" from the other limits to the exception that exists within 30.8(11), such as holding a broadcast license.
Grammatically, "this requirement" would seem to refer back to "must hold a broadcasting license." That is, the conditions for eligibility for the broadcasting undertaking exception are:
ReplyDelete1) hold a broadcasting license, or
2) be exempt from the requirement to hold a broadcasting license.
In each case, the CRTC makes the determination with respect to eligibility, but that's it.
I can't see any harm in asking for a clarification, but it seems straightforward to me.
I am still not convinced we interpreted the language of the bill differently. I think where we may have a problem is that my comment was poorly written.
ReplyDeleteOld:
"Not sure, but does this allow the CRTC to authorize exemptions for unlicensed new media? (See discussion on blogspot)"
How about:
"This allows the Ephemeral Recordings exemption to apply to entities that hold a broadcasting license, as well as allowing the CRTC to exempt additional entities that don't have a broadcast license. This additional flexibility will hopefully be used by the CRTC to enable this exemption for new media which, being unlicensed, were ineligible for similar exemptions."