Archive for March, 2015

Stop Bill C-51 by Jeremy Board (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/rCFtMw

A Conversation About Bill C-51: How the Anti-Terrorism Bill Undermines Canadian Privacy

Yesterday, I had the honour of participating in a terrific panel at the University of Ottawa on Bill C-51 alongside colleagues Dean Nathalie Des Rosiers and Joanne St. Lewis (the panel was moderated by the Toronto Star’s Tonda MacCharles and organized by Carissima Mathen). My remarks focused on the privacy implications of Bill C-51, drawing on a recent column on the issue (Toronto Star version, homepage version). My opening comments are posted below.

A Conversation About Bill C-51

Thanks to Carissima Mathen for organizing this panel. It’s a great idea and given that this week looks like the final week for committee hearings, very timely.

It is hard to know where to start with Bill C-51. So I’m not going to start with the bill at all. In fact, I’d like to share my context for reviewing the bill and provide a far more personal take than is typical. There is good reason for doing so – if you have followed the rather limited committee hearings to date, you know that government MPs have made deeply personal comments, raising questions about the loyalty to Canada of some witnesses and whether critics of the bill believe terrorism is a threat.

March 24, 2015 — 35 comments — News

Privacy Under Attack in Anti-Terror Bill

Appeared in the Toronto Star on March 14, 2015 as Privacy Under Attack in Anti-Terror Bill As witnesses line up to warn about the dangers associated with Bill C-51, Canada’s anti-terrorism bill, it is increasingly clear that the proposed legislation is an unprecedented undermining of Canadian privacy protection. Much of […]

March 24, 2015 — 1 comment — Columns Archive

Bell Media - Ottawa by Obert Madondo (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/qJYGtC

Why the Vertically Integrated TV Giants Are the CRTC’s Hidden Target in Pick-and-Pay Decision

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission last week announced much-anticipated plans to require cable and satellite companies to offer consumers basic television packages for an affordable $25 per month alongside the option of picking the television channels they want without requiring them to purchase expensive bundles.

Despite some hand wringing that the changes will lead to reduced revenues for broadcasters, my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that it is readily apparent that the CRTC is committed to reducing or eliminating outdated regulations in the hope of fostering a more competitive broadcast environment. Consumer choice for television channels, greater flexibility for broadcaster programming, adjustments to Canadian content requirements, and the enforcement of net neutrality rules all fall within the same broader strategy of exercising its regulatory muscle to enable a level playing field and encourage the development of globally competitive content.

What makes the latest CRTC decision particularly notable is that it identifies a new threat to a competitive broadcast environment. Much to the chagrin of many within the Canadian system, it isn’t Netflix. In recent months, seemingly everyone has had a turn taking shots at the enormously popular online video service: the Government of Ontario has called for a Netflix tax, Bell Media has asked for measures to block access to the U.S. service, and many creator groups have urged the CRTC to adopt new regulations for online media.

March 23, 2015 — 2 comments — Columns

Vertically Integrated TV Giants Are the CRTC’s Hidden Target

Appeared in the Toronto Star on March 21, 2015 as TV Giants are the CRTC’s Real Target The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission last week announced much-anticipated plans to require cable and satellite companies to offer consumers basic television packages for an affordable $25 per month alongside the option of […]

March 23, 2015 — 3 comments — Columns Archive

Really? Eh, I'll just take your word for it. by jayRaz (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/4FPLn4

Beware of the Scare Tactics, Part Two: CRTC Unveils Cheap Basic Service and Pick-and-Pay

As expected, the CRTC ruled yesterday that it will require cable and satellite companies to offer a mandatory basic service capped at $25 per month (which may include U.S. channels) and a pick-and-pay alternative for individual channels no later than December 2016. As also expected, the doomsayers are out in full force, trying to explain why a low priced service and more consumer choice will lead to higher cable bills. The Globe and Mail’s Kate Taylor predicts “my bet is that most Canadians will find themselves piecing together a smaller cable package that will cost just about the same as the old behemoth.” The National Post’s Terrance Corcoran says that no one will buy the basic bundle and that “what is clear is that, when viewers start picking [bundles and channels], the amount they end up paying could go up.”

Yet that analysis runs counter to what business analysts expect to happen. Maher Yaghi of Desjardins Capital Markets says the changes could “lead to a reduction of $5 to $10 in monthly [revenue per user] as customers get the option to choose the channels they want to watch and move discretionary money toward OTT (over-the-top) services such as Netflix.” Canaccord Genuity analyst Dvai Ghose suggests even bigger declines of $9 to $21 for some customers. In fact, Ghose notes that “current entry-level TV monthly prices for the large BDUs are as follows: Bell Fibe TV $45.95, Rogers Cable $40.48, Shaw $39.90 and Videotron $38.00 and Telus $34.00 ($29.00 if bundled).” A $25 service is obviously going to result in reduced spending for those consumers.”

March 20, 2015 — 21 comments — News