Bourne, C.

I wanted to point out some of the challenges with copyright we've been having in the campus and community radio sector (consisting of non-profit, volunteer-based stations). Although this is not strictly the view of the 'average' user of copyrighted material, it does highlight the challenges that organizations who are not seeking to monetize their use of copyrighted material face – which is why I think universities, libraries, journalists and other nonprofit groups were so quick to oppose Bill C61. The government hasn't adequately addressed non-profit use of copyrighted materials in Bill C-61 or any of its previous incarnations.

• Obviously, the radio sector does not support the use of digital locks. There are very practical reasons for why we would, as radio stations, need to change music between formats (ie. for storage, for late night automation). There's also the problem that digital locks pose for journalistic investigation.
• We've had huge problems as of late because according to government legislation, anyone can create a copyright collective and then start charging tariffs for use. Canada has one of the highest number of copyright collectives in the world, something like 30 or 40. And every time a new technology comes out, we are charged a new tariff: we're charged for our FM transmission, for internet streaming, for storing digital music on our computers, and for podcasting, even though what we are doing is still essentially unchanged: we're simply being broadcasters. Added to the problem is that my sector does not gain any additional revenue streams for any of these new uses, but we do face additional expenses.

So between the ever increasing number of copyright collectives and the ever increasing number of tariffs (sometimes applied to us retroactively, so we're blindsided), we're starting to face a significant enough financial burden that some stations are not taking advantage of all the technologies available to them. It's holding back smaller stations and only allowing large ones to compete within the industry. And as a sector which is supposed to promote alternative / underground / marginalized music, this scheme only rewards payment of copyright to large and successful artists, not smaller emerging ones.

• Because of the proliferation of copyright collectives and tariffs, more direction is needed from the government to the Copyright Board to prevent an increasingly fragmented copyright regime. When the Copyright Board considers a tariff, it considers that tariff in isolation from everything else being charged; it considers each tariff on its own merit. It doesn't consider how much of a financial burden that all the tariffs collectively place on an organization. There needs to be some sort of supervisory mechanism for Copyright collectives to prevent an increasing volume of new tariffs that charge multiple times for use of the same material. There needs to be a cap placed in new legislation for all tariffs for non-profits such as campus and community radio stations – like there is in section 68.1 of the current act.