TVO's Search Engine features a detailed interview with Industry Minister Tony Clement on Bill C-32. Clement is clearly sensitive to the concerns associated with digital locks in the bill, though his suggestion that the new provision on ephemeral recordings would allow broadcasters to circumvent locks for news reporting does not appear consistent with the bill.
Clement Interview on TVO’s Search Engine
June 15, 2010
Share this post
4 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 260: What the Government Didn’t Want You To Hear About Bill C-4 And Its Weak Political Party Privacy Rules
byMichael Geist

March 2, 2026
Michael Geist
February 23, 2026
Michael Geist
February 9, 2026
Michael Geist
Episode 256: Jennifer Quaid on Taking On Big Tech With the Competition Act's Private Right of Access
February 2, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 261: Ian Goldberg on the Privacy Risks of Age Assurance Technologies
Government Enacts Political Party Anti-Privacy Rules With Bill C-4 Royal Assent Sprint
A Tale of Two Bills: Lawful Access Returns With Changes to Warrantless Access But Dangerous Backdoor Surveillance Risks Remain
Words Are Not Enough: Countering Relentless Antisemitic Violence in Canada With Action
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 260: What the Government Didn’t Want You To Hear About Bill C-4 And Its Weak Political Party Privacy Rules

Link to the actual article
Here’s a link to the TV Ontario program page
http://www.tvo.org/cfmx/tvoorg/searchengine/index.cfm?page_id=613&action=blog&subaction=viewPost&post_id=12824&blog_id=485
Would have been good to have that too, not just a link directly to the MP3 podcast!
Thanks,
@Shultzter
Your link sucketh. (doesn’t work)
Tony Clement … is NOT a tool!
I hope the guy isn’t lying through his teeth in that interview…because after listening he even managed to get a hardened cynic like myself to see just a glimmer of hope for good in this upcoming copyright legislation.
I was hoping for examples of breaking digital locks that don’t infringe on anything at all, but still must be stopped to explain why they bill should be set up that way. All the examples Tony mentioned as being “the industry’s side of the argument” were infringing examples even if digital locks were tied to infringment. I found no actually argument or explanation for the bills stance on digital locks in the interview.