The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has posted two entries on the C-61, noting the privacy implications of the bill.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada Blogging on C-61
June 23, 2008
Share this post
2 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada's Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
byMichael Geist

June 22, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
From CCH to ChatGPT: How Canadian Copyright Law Played the Key Role in Deciding a Leading AI Training Data Case in India
Starting Over: Court Filing Confirms the CRTC’s Streamer Contribution Decisions Are Dead With a Full Online Streaming Act Reset to Come
The Name on the Window Was Enough: The Attacks on Kiva’s and the Normalization of Antisemitic Violence in Canada
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada’s Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
A Surveillance Treaty in Disguise: The Trouble With Canada’s Quiet Decision to Sign the UN Cybercrime Convention

Goo to see
That the Privacy Commissioner is raising, in particular, the fact that the DRM mechanisms that have been used in the past can cause privacy issues. While as I understand it the bill contains permission to remove DRM that breaches privacy regulations, doesn’t the other part of the bill that make holding DRM removal software and equipment illegal effectively negate that permission?
The saving grace in all of this? Since Canada is such a small market, I can’t see the publishers setting up a different DRM setup for Canada.
Re: Goo to see
Jeez, it must be early, and I am not typing well. The subject should have been “Good to see”