Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  I think that you have put your finger on another problem with this bill, which is sort of what we were discussing earlier. The technical protection measures are an obligation for Canada, in any case, because the WIPO treaties state that, one way or another, we have to have these technical protection measures.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  That is a question you should put to the lawmakers. I'm not sure it's a good thing. You're right that the people who make use of TPMs may cause problems for other people who have a legitimate desire to take advantage of certain exceptions in the legislation. That is why I think we have to look at what is being done in Europe.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Well, there may be challenges. Last Monday, Ysolde Gendreau testified before the committee, and I believe that she explained at some length that the bill, as currently worded, would have trouble meeting the standard if it were subject to the three-tiered test, in particular. That means there would be challenges to trade organizations, either the WTO or another organization.

Bill C-32 (40th Parliament, 3rd Session) committee  Mr. Chairman, my comments will deal mainly with the complexity of the legislation, and I'm available to answer your questions in that regard. Our hope was that Bill C-32 would clarify the underlying principle of the act, and yet we are left with a far more complex piece of legislation that includes an increasing number of exceptions, as well as exceptions to exceptions, to the point where it becomes very difficult to make sense of anything under the circumstances.