New Treasury Board President Tony Clement has said he’s committed to advancing the government’s open data efforts. Clement noted that initaitive is consistent with what he was trying to do as Industry Minister on the digital economy strategy.
Archive for May, 2011
Web Surveillance Legislation Requires Study, Not Speed
The Conservatives argue that the omnibus approach is needed since the opposition parties “obstructed” passage of their crime and justice reforms during successive minority governments. Yet included within the crime bill package is likely to be legislation creating new surveillance requirements and police powers that has never received extensive debate on the floor of the House of Commons and never been the subject of committee hearings.
The package is benignly nicknamed “lawful access,” but isn’t benign. If the Conservatives move forward with their complete lawful access package, it would feature a three-pronged approach focused on information disclosure, mandated surveillance technologies, and new police powers.
The Cabinet Shuffle: Why a New Industry Minister May Not Mean Changed Policies or Big Delays
Tony Clement made digital policies a core part of his agenda both in terms of prioritizing the issues and using technology to actively communicate and interact with the public. Given the uncertainty of Paradis’ priorities and the need to become familiar with some complex files, it is understandable that many speculate the cabinet shuffle will slow the process of change and possibly alter the substance. I must admit that I’m not so sure. Every minister has the chance to put their own mark on departmental policies, but I suspect both the core substance of Canadian digital policy and the speed of change will remain largely unchanged.
Is Access Copyright Claiming a Trademark in ©?
Howard Knopf points to Access Copyright’s revised site design that includes a trademark notice on the © symbol. A search of the trademark database does not show an attempted registration of the © alone.
UK IP Report Recommends Creating New Copyright Exceptions, Warns Against Over Regulation
Because IPRs grant a form of monopoly, an overly rigid and inflexible IP framework can act as a barrier to innovation. When a firm has acquired exclusive rights over its innovative technology or content, other firms will be able to learn from that technology or see the content, but may be unable to use them for further innovation unless licensing can be agreed. IPRs can constrain third parties wishing to access or innovate on top of this protected knowledge or content, with potentially serious economic and social costs.
The report also notes that a considerable amount of IP policy is often not based on economic evidence, citing as examples the EU database directive and the extension of the term of copyright.
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 200: Colin Bennett on the EU’s Surprising Adequacy Finding on Canadian Privacy Law 
Debating the Online Harms Act: Insights from Two Recent Panels on Bill C-63 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act 
AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 198: Richard Moon on the Return of the Section 13 Hate Speech Provision in the Online Harms Act
