No related posts.


The Government Tries to Make the Case for Bill C-22: Why Its Own Use Cases Reveal Disproportionate Overreach
Tech Exodus: Why Bill C-22’s Privacy and Security Risks Will Drive Digital Services Out of the Country
The Lawful Access Two-Headed Surveillance Monster: How Bill C-22 Went Off the Rails
How Much Further Will Lawful Access Go?: Police Chief Tells Bill C-22 Hearing That Three Years of Metadata Retention Would Be “Ideal”
Bill C-22’s Groundhog Day: Why the Government’s Dismissal of Signal, Apple and the U.S. Congress Concerns Runs Back the Disastrous Online News Act Playbook
Michael Geist
mgeist@uottawa.ca
This web site is licensed under a Creative Commons License, although certain works referenced herein may be separately licensed.
The most glaring thing about this report is the input from the conservatives … there is none. Gee I wonder why?
I like the idea of a cultural compensation fund, which I would assume would come from general revenue, over a media levy. Why? Because it will be directly benefiting CANADIAN artists, rather than a levy in which the lions share would most likely flow out of the country.
I posted this question to a certain copyright purist and was told that a media tax was fine going to foreign interests as we have signed an international agreement to do so. Fair enough, but I am unclear if our biggest cultural partner [USA] has a similar system of levies to compensate Canadian artists? Can anyone clarify that?
Transparancy lacking
There should be no handing over of funds until there is proof that artists actually get it.