On the heels of the National Post's warning against a copyright bill, the Toronto Star has published a masthead editorial calling on Industry Minister Jim Prentice to introduce a new copyright bill. The Star reported that several copyright lobby groups met with the editorial board in late January to discuss the issue.
Toronto Star Calls for Copyright Bill
March 3, 2008
Tags: cdmca / copyright / Copyright Canada / copyright for canadians / Copyright Microsite - Mainstream Media Coverage / dmca / prentice / toronto star
Share this post
4 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 237: A Conversation with Jason Woywada of BCFIPA on Political Party Privacy and Bill C-4
byMichael Geist

June 23, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
Canadian Government Caves on Digital Services Tax After Years of Dismissing the Risks of Trade Retaliation
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 238: David Fraser on Why Bill C-2’s Lawful Access Powers May Put Canadians’ Digital Security At Risk
Ignoring the Warning Signs: Why Did the Canadian Government Dismiss the Trade Risks of a Digital Services Tax?
Why Bill C-2 Faces a Likely Constitutional Challenge By Placing Solicitor-Client Privilege at Risk
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 237: A Conversation with Jason Woywada of BCFIPA on Political Party Privacy and Bill C-4
They seem to love quoting Mr. Graham Henderson. Somebody needs to remind them that the CRIA is ironically named, seeing as they have basically no Canadian connections. I’d also like to know exactly why the editorial board of a major newspaper felt the need to meet with copyright lobbyists. What exactly did they talk about? Did they have some requests or concerns about how The Star portrays the copyright battle in their paper?
Perhaps the Toronto Star should ask whey copyright needs to be strengthened in the first place? Mr. Geist has already pointed out that America copyright law is weaker than Canadian copyright law.
Newspapers should just describe facts and not opinions. When they express opinions they are “forging” the thinking of their subscribers which is not ethical in a democratic and pluralistic country.
for the poster at 14:19, at least the piece was listed as an editorial, as opposed to being presented as a “news” item. And they addressed the need for balance, although this was mentioned briefly in the last paragraph, which to me is not particularly balanced in itself.