Dalhousie law professor Graham Reynolds published an op-ed in the Mark News, in which he argues that the claims of balance are more marketing than reality owing to the digital lock provisions.
Reynolds on the C-32 Balance
June 11, 2010
Share this post
One Comment

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

It seems that nearly everyone has singled out the DRM clauses in C-32. These clauses are put together in such a way as to nullify the exceptions granted under fair dealing.
When this many people quickly see the obvious contradictions in C-32, I have to wonder if anybody actually read and understood what they put into C-32? Hopefully this question will be raised during question period.