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 278: Ben Waldman on Gander Social and the Challenges of Building a Sovereign Social Network
byMichael Geist

August 10, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
Why Ottawa Will Likely Join the U.S. in Opposing the Quebec Online Streaming Law at the Centre of the Trade Battle
Online Harms’ Forgotten Generation: Why the Government Needs to Pay Attention to Protecting Seniors
Culture Off the Table? What the Collapsed Canada-U.S. Trade Talks Reveal About the Carney Government’s Cultural Policy
Digital Trade Alignment: What May Be in Play in the Canada-U.S. Trade Deal
TMU Picks Damage Control Over Fixing the Damage: Behind Its Shameful Response to the Devastating Benotto Report on Campus Antisemitism

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.