Archive for March, 2015

prism privacy by Eric Slatkin (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/eSQeNV

Why The Anti-Terrorism Bill is Really an Anti-Privacy Bill: Bill C-51’s Evisceration of Privacy Protection

“The first and main concern is the privacy issue…since the information is to be shared by different levels of government and different governmental bodies. There is a risk that privacy can be compromised. The more information is transferred and shared, the greater the risk of security of the information.

Nearly twenty years ago, that was Stephen Harper, then a Reform Party MP warning against the privacy implications of an electronic voter registry and the fear that information sharing within government raised significant privacy concerns. Today, there is a very different Stephen Harper, who as Prime Minister is fast-tracking a bill that eviscerates privacy protections within the public sector.  Much of the focus on Bill C-51 has related to oversight: the government implausibly claims that it increases oversight (it does not), the Liberals say they support the bill but would like better oversight, and much of the NDP criticism has also centered on oversight. Yet with respect to privacy and Bill C-51, lack of oversight is only a part of the problem.

Read more ›

March 12, 2015 35 comments News
Wiertz Sebastien - Privacy by Sebastien Wiertz (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/ahk6nh

Fixing the Digital Privacy Act: My Bill S-4 Appearance Before the Industry Committee

Yesterday I appeared before the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology to discuss Bill S-4, the Digital Privacy Act. The discussion focused on a wide range of concerns, including the shortcomings in the security breach disclosure rules and the need for greater enforcement powers for the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Metro News covered the appearance.  My opening remarks are posted below.  I’ll link to the full transcript once available.

Read more ›

March 11, 2015 Comments are Disabled Committees, News
052:365 - 06/21/2012 - Netflix by Shardayyy (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/cisnRo

Behind the Scenes of Ontario’s Campaign for a Netflix Tax

The prospect of a “Netflix tax” will be back in the spotlight this week as Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission chair Jean-Pierre Blais unveils the CRTC’s latest round of rulings stemming from its review of broadcast policy. While it is unlikely that the commission will impose a new fee on Netflix subscribers to support the creation of Canadian content, it will not be for lack of lobbying on the issue.

Despite the fact that a Netflix tax would yield less than one per cent of the annual expenditures on Canadian television financing (about $15 million dollars in support for a sector that spent $2.3 billion last year), most content groups called for mandatory Canadian content contribution funding from online video providers during the CRTC’s TalkTV hearings. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that amidst the clamour for new funding, there was one voice that attracted the most attention – the Government of Ontario.

Read more ›

March 10, 2015 6 comments Columns

Behind the Scenes of Ontario’s Campaign for a Netflix Tax

Appeared in the Toronto Star on March 7, 2015 as Behind the Scenes of Ontario’s Campaign for a Netflix Tax The prospect of a “Netflix tax” will be back in the spotlight this week as Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission chair Jean-Pierre Blais unveils the CRTC’s latest round of rulings […]

Read more ›

March 10, 2015 3 comments Columns Archive
Surrender by Jess (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/dSCDrf

Raising the Broadcast White Flag: What Lies Behind Bell’s Radical Plan to Raise TV Fees, Block Content, Violate Net Neutrality & Fight Netflix

Kevin Crull, Bell Media’s President delivered a much-anticipated keynote speech at the Prime Time in Ottawa conference on Friday. Titled “The New Reality: Broadcasting in Canada”, Crull’s claim was that the new reality for broadcasting in Canada is unsustainable and requires massive regulatory change. While Crull argued that Bell doesn’t want protection (in fact, incredibly claimed that a company that has benefited from foreign investment restrictions, genre protection, and simultaneous substitution has never had protection), he proceeded to outline a series of radical reforms that would raise television fees, block access to U.S. channels, violate net neutrality rules, and make Netflix less attractive to consumers. Couched in terms of “level playing fields” and “secure rights markets”, the speech was fundamentally an admission that given the competitive challenges, Bell’s hope is for a regulatory overhaul.

The key slide within the presentation can be found here. Crull certainly spoke about creating great content, though on the previous day Bell executives cautioned against programs that are “too Canadian.” The major focus of Crull’s talk wasn’t on content creation – the overwhelming majority of Bell Media’s leading programs are licensed from U.S. broadcasters – but rather on proposed changes to the regulatory framework.

Read more ›

March 9, 2015 27 comments News