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
Tags: cdmca / copyright / Copyright Canada / copyright for canadians / Copyright Microsite - Mainstream Media Coverage / dmca / prentice / toronto star
4 Comments
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 248: Mark Surman on Why Canada’s AI Strategy Should Prioritize Public AI Models 
We Need More Canada in the Training Data: My Appearance Before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage on AI and the Creative Sector 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 247: My Senate Appearance on the Bill That Could Lead to Canada-Wide Blocking of X, Reddit and ChatGPT 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 246: Mohamed Zohiri on the Rise and Emerging Regulation of Stablecoins 
Senate Bill Would Grant Government Regulatory Power to Mandate Age Verification For Search, Social Media and AI Services Accompanied By Threat of Court Ordered Blocking of Lawful Content
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.