The Edmonton Journal runs an op-ed on the negative implications of the digital lock provisions in C-32 for Canadian consumers.
Copyright Bill Shortchanges Consumers
June 17, 2010
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
Three Years After October 7th: Living With the Shockwaves
What If the U.S. Demanded This? The Cloud Provider Conditions Behind Canada’s EU Digital Pivot
Ontario is Done Waiting for Universities to Act on Campus Antisemitism
Is Compromise on Encryption Possible? Why Bill C-22’s “Minor Opening” Leaves the Central Question Unanswered
The Wrong Target: Why the CBC Should Be Asking About the Yom Kippur Protesters, Not the Journalist Who Reported on Them

That’s some of the worst writing I’ve seen in a newspaper. And this person is a vice president of a university?
I guess that’s why academics have editors…
@AWJ
I’m not really sure where your coming from, I don’t see errors or anything that would make it the ‘worst writing seen in a newspaper.’
I personally think the writing style is bang on for it’s purpose – an easy read that explains the problems with tpm as presented in the bill. It’s not literature nor academic writing… it’s for quick informative consumption.
Mr.
It’s just the usual spin-doctoring by the entertainment lobby, that’s all. It certainly isn’t bad writing.
Proof? You can’t handle the proof!
@AWJ – It’s bad because it’s against the bill, of course! Who needs more examples other than that?
Seriously, bad how? Give at least a few significant examples before spewing trash talk. Plus, even assuming the grammar is bad (which I assume you speak of since you don’t say what’s wrong) you avoided the subject matter of the article completely. It’s more of a personal letter than a news article if that’s your beef and what’s wrong with that, A Wrong Jerk?