Day four of the CRTC's New Media hearings featured an interesting mix of presentations as several creator groups sought to advance the discussion with variations on earlier proposals. Carleton professor Ira Wagman provides the details on his blog (part one, part two). Thanks to Samantha Burton for compiling the report.
CRTC New Media Hearings – Day Four: CFPTA, DOC, WGC, SAC, CDM, RPM
2 Comments
Recent Posts
Slick Videos Won’t Save Lawful Access: Why The Government’s Bill C-22 Defence Avoids the Charter, Privacy and Security Concerns Raised By Critics 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 268: Sara Grimes on the Moral Panic Behind Banning Kids from Social Media and AI Chatbots 
U.S. Congressional Leaders Warn Canadian Lawful Access Plans Harm U.S. National Security and Economic Interests 
Make It Make Sense: My Appearance Before the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on Bill C-22’s Lawful Access Plan 
Why Social Media and AI Chatbot Bans for Kids Are Bad Policy: Making the Case at the Senate Social Affairs, Science and Tech Committee
Time for a change….
Hi Michael,
It’s time the CRTC grew some collective family jewels on this matter.
Canada now lags far behind the US [and most European countries] in recognizing these “traffic shaping” and “packet inspection” methods amount to nothing more than anticompetitive and monopolistic practices.
Further, it’s long past due that the individual Canadian’s rights with respect to Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were recognized by the CRTC – specifically with respect to Section 2, sub b. Quote: 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: … b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; Unquote
Why should telecos and carriers get to decide who we converse with, how we converse with them, or what we converse about? Sorry, but this is nothing more than self-serving censorship on the telcos and carriers part.
Further, where is the initiative for these parties to competitively engage each other in a free and open market? If Bell does this, and Rogers does this; then Telus and Shaw must match these same practices, in order to remain competitive [as things are currently structured].
It’s time for a change in how these people treat Canadian consumers.
Enough Already
This comment from CFPTA literally makes me sick to my stomache, “to ensure that Canadians have ample opportunity to participate in and enjoy distinctly Canadian broadcasting.”
That is what the internet does now, without a fee attached to it or forcing anyone to view X amount of content created from one country. If Canadian broadcasting is worth watching on the internet, guess what? We will find it and enjoy it!
If Canadians have some great content to add, guess what? The internet makes it so it is very cost effective to reach an enormous crowd of not only Canadians, but the world.
This whole thing is a joke and a huge waste of taxpayer money.