|
Tuesday November 06, 2012 |
The fall of 2007 was a particularly bleak period for Canadians
concerned with digital policies. The government had just issued a
policy direction to the CRTC to adopt a hands-off regulatory
approach even as consumer prices for Internet and wireless services
were increasing. Meanwhile, the Department of Public Safety held a
semi-secret consultation on Internet surveillance where mandatory
disclosure of subscriber information was assumed.
Moreover, the CRTC had largely rejected mounting concerns with the
way Internet providers managed their networks (often called network
neutrality), there were doubts about new wireless competitors
entering the marketplace, Industry Canada had seemingly no interest
in developing anti-spam laws or updating privacy legislation, the
government agreed to participate in negotiations on the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, and a copyright bill with
virtually no user-oriented provision was being prepared for
introduction.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto
Star version, homepage
version) notes that fast forward five years later and the CRTC
has now positioned itself as a staunch defender of the public
interest with consumer concerns at the centre of its policy making
process, a lawful access bill was introduced in the spring but is
viewed as politically dead, the CRTC has crafted and enforced new
net neutrality rules, anti-spam legislation has been enacted, there
are several new wireless providers and the removal of most foreign
investment restrictions, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is
discredited after being rejected by the European Parliament, and
copyright reform is set to take effect this week with a host of user
safeguards and rights.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday November 06, 2012 |
|
View
|
|
|
Tuesday November 06, 2012 |
Appeared
in the Toronto Star on November 4, 2012 as How Canadians Reclaimed
the Public Interest on Digital Policy
The fall of 2007 was a particularly bleak period for Canadians
concerned with digital policies. The government had just issued a
policy direction to the CRTC to adopt a hands-off regulatory
approach even as consumer prices for Internet and wireless services
were increasing. Meanwhile, the Department of Public Safety held a
semi-secret consultation on Internet surveillance where mandatory
disclosure of subscriber information was assumed.
Moreover, the CRTC had largely rejected mounting concerns with the
way Internet providers managed their networks (often called network
neutrality), there were doubts about new wireless competitors
entering the marketplace, Industry Canada had seemingly no interest
in developing anti-spam laws or updating privacy legislation, the
government agreed to participate in negotiations on the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, and a copyright bill with
virtually no user-oriented provision was being prepared for
introduction.
Fast forward five years later and the CRTC has now positioned itself
as a staunch defender of the public interest with consumer concerns
at the centre of its policy making process, a lawful access bill was
introduced in the spring but is viewed as politically dead, the CRTC
has crafted and enforced new net neutrality rules, anti-spam
legislation has been enacted, there are several new wireless
providers and the removal of most foreign investment restrictions,
the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is discredited after being
rejected by the European Parliament, and copyright reform is set to
take effect this week with a host of user safeguards and rights.
While many remain skeptical, the shift toward the public interest in
the development of Canadian digital policies ranks as one of the
most remarkable policy transformations of the current Conservative
government. The change is not absolute - Canada caved to U.S.
pressure on several copyright issues, delayed implementation of the
anti-spam bill due to corporate lobbying, and is negotiating new
trade treaties that could undo much of the recent progress - but the
state of Canadian digital policy is far better than anyone could
have reasonably anticipated several years ago.
There are undoubtedly many factors behind the shift, but topping the
list was the confluence of three inter-related developments.
First, Internet and digital policy issues went from niche issues to
the mainstream since the rules associated with Internet access,
wireless services, social media, user generated content, and privacy
became far more personal with implications for millions of people.
Digital policy may have once focused chiefly on commercial concerns
attracting limited public attention, but the public has increasingly
connected these policies to their own lives.
As a result, thousands of Canadians participated in a 2009 copyright
consultation, more than 500,000 people signed a petition on Internet
billing, hundreds of thousands took to the streets in Europe to
protest against ACTA, and the government faced an overwhelming
backlash against its Internet surveillance plans.
Second, the Internet was not only a serious concern for many
Canadians, but it also provided the mechanisms to ensure their
voices were heard. Social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter,
blogs, and online video provided an avenue for Canadians to become
informed about the issues and the means to speak out.
Third, the government gradually realized that missteps on digital
policy could be politically costly, while good policy was also good
politics. The payoff may be slow in coming, but the emergence of
digital policies that prioritize public concerns leave opposition
parties with less ammunition for criticism and the promise of
greater competition and innovation.
Many have been quick to dismiss the public voice on digital issues,
deriding Canadians that speak out as seeking a free ride, or being
uniformed or ignorant of the complexity of the issues. The same
groups often simply ignore those views altogether, as if the public
submissions were just noise with no discernible impact.
Yet the Canadian experience of the past five years demonstrates a
clear shift in approach with legislation, regulation, and policy
outcomes that once seemed highly unlikely. The public interest will
not win out on every issue, but its impact is evident throughout the
digital landscape.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and
E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can
reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday November 06, 2012 |
|
|
Tuesday September 07, 2010 |
|
Zak Muscovitch, a Toronto domain name lawyer running for the CIRA
board, has an interesting
article on the dot-ca administrator and the public interest.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday September 07, 2010 |
|
|
Wednesday September 28, 2005 |
I am delighted to report that In the Public Interest: The Future of Canadian Copyright Law has been published and is now available for purchase or free download under a Creative Commons license (I should note that all royalties will be donated to Creative Commons).
I have great hopes for this book as I believe that by bringing together 19 experts from across Canada for a peer-reviewed, 600-page text on Bill C-60 and future Canadian copyright reform we will succeed in raising the quality of the copyright debate and ensure that there is a voice for non-partisan experts who are committed to copyright in the broader public interest.
The book divides the 19 contributions into three parts. Following my introduction, part one contains three essays (Murray, Scassa, Tawfik) that place Canadian copyright reform in context.
Part two features eleven essays on Bill C-60 including four contributions on TPMs (deBeer, Bailey, Kerr, Geist), two on education issues (Trosow, Wilkinson), and individual articles on RMI (Perry), making available (Fewer), ISP issues (Hamilton), performers' rights (Sundara Rajan), and photographers' issues (Cameron).
Part three turns to the future of Canadian copyright reform with five exceptional pieces on fair dealing (Craig), user rights (Drassinower), copyright term (Lametti), extended licensing (Gervais), and crown copyright (Judge).
I' m grateful to all the contributors who put aside other commitments to get this done in an incredibly compressed time frame, to the peer-reviewers who provided great feedback, and to Irwin Law, for embracing not only the opportunity to publish a book on Canadian copyright but to adopt the Creative Commons license.
As we embark on a debate on the future of Canadian copyright, we need to hear from our own experts in their voice. This book moves us in that direction. Buy it or download it, but most of all read it.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareWednesday September 28, 2005 |
|
|
