Earlier this month, the government shocked the culture sector by announcing it was effectively reversing the CRTC decision that implemented the Online Streaming Act. Culture Minister Marc Miller tried to cushion the blow with a promise of $600 million in support for the audio and audiovisual sectors, but there was no escaping the anger from some over abandoning a policy that had been years in the making. Weeks later, it is still not clear what precisely the government intends to do. In fact, it is increasingly evident that there is no plan, with the government improvising on critical issues such as the implementation of the reversal, funding for news, and the eventual contribution requirements for Internet streamers.
Latest Posts
Soft Ban or Hard Verification Requirement?: Why Bill C-34’s Social Media Ban Exemption Gets the Incentives Wrong and Comes Too Late to Matter
The debate over Bill C-34’s social media ban for those under sixteen has largely focused on the impact on users, including mandated age verification for millions, the privacy risks of verification technologies, and experience elsewhere suggesting the policy is ineffective. Defenders of the ban have characterized the Canadian approach as a “soft ban” that will allow social media companies to obtain exemptions provided they meet yet-to-be-determined safety standards. This approach is said to create incentives for companies to address safety concerns and qualify for the exemption. But a closer look at the bill reveals that the approach does not work, as even “safe” services will be required to implement age verification for tens of millions of users. By the time the Digital Safety Commission has figured anything out, the services will have verified most of the country and likely lost users in the process. This is true not only for services that require significant design changes, but even those services that today would be widely acknowledged to be safe for children.
New Rights, New Powers, Long Delays: Bill C-36’s Seven-Step Process for Privacy Reform to Take Effect
The government’s recently tabled privacy reform bill would modernize many aspects of Canadian privacy law, including establishing privacy as a fundamental right in the purpose clause of the new law, creating a data mobility right for individuals that would enable them to move their data from one company to another, and giving businesses the potential to use approved codes of practice. These and many other changes will be subject to intense debate at committee, but the biggest challenge facing the bill is the long sequence of steps required for it to take effect. The government may claim that privacy is an urgent priority, and its recent national AI strategy, overseen by AI Minister Evan Solomon, declares trust to be its “north star”, yet a careful review of Bill C-36 confirms that the law will take years to take effect. This post and the accompanying infographic unpack the many steps built into the bill that, cumulatively, are likely to result in no substantive privacy reforms for Canadians until 2030 or later.
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 273: Rebroadcast of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel on Canada’s First Steps Towards a Social Media Ban
Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act, has quickly become a lightning rod for debate since its introduction earlier this month. The issue that invariably tops the list is the kids’ social media ban. Bill C-34, along with the recently introduced Bill C-36, will be covered from multiple angles in the weeks ahead. For the moment, I am pleased to rebroadcast a recent episode of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel podcast. I was invited to appear on the program, where I was interviewed by Sherril Sutherland about Bill C-34, the ban, and online harms and safety more broadly. I am grateful to the Globe for granting permission to rebroadcast the episode on my podcast uncut, in its entirety.
Midnight Madness: The Government Rushes Lawful Access Bill Through the House Without Debate or a Recorded Vote
Bill C-22, the lawful access bill, passed the House of Commons yesterday with the government invoking a single motion to approve several bills without further debate or individual votes as MPs raced for home for the summer. Bill C-22 will now head to the Senate, where it can expect a rougher ride when study begins in the fall. Rather than use the final days of the House session to answer the privacy, security, and oversight concerns raised by the Privacy Commissioner, academics, technology companies, and civil society groups, the government spent the time ensuring it would not have to, rushing the bill through committee, cutting off debate, and maligning critics with tactics that they once decried when in opposition.
Recent Posts
Improv Policy: The Government Doesn’t Know What To Do About Its Online Streaming Act Mess 
Soft Ban or Hard Verification Requirement?: Why Bill C-34’s Social Media Ban Exemption Gets the Incentives Wrong and Comes Too Late to Matter 
New Rights, New Powers, Long Delays: Bill C-36’s Seven-Step Process for Privacy Reform to Take Effect 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 273: Rebroadcast of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel on Canada’s First Steps Towards a Social Media Ban 
Midnight Madness: The Government Rushes Lawful Access Bill Through the House Without Debate or a Recorded Vote
