The first three posts in the case against the Bell coalition website plan focused on why it has failed to provide convincing evidence that the drastic step of site blocking is needed (existing law, weak evidence on Canadian piracy, limited negative impact on the market). The series continues by examining some of the problems with the proposal itself. One of the most obvious problems – indeed one that is fatal – is the absence of court orders for website blocking. The attempt to avoid direct court involvement in blocking decisions means the proposal suffers from an absence of full due process, raising a myriad of legal concerns. If adopted, the coalition website plan would put Canada at odds with almost every other country that has permitted blocking since the data is unequivocal: the overwhelming majority require a court order for site blocking.
Archive for February 15th, 2018
Episode 66: Ann Cavoukian on Why Canadians Can Trust the COVID Alert App
by Michael Geist
October 19, 2020
August 24, 2020
August 17, 2020
August 10, 2020
Episode 62: Colin Bennett on What the Schrems II Decision Means for Global Data Transfers and Canadian Privacy Law
August 3, 2020
Search Results placeholder
- The LawBytes Podcast, Episode 66: Ann Cavoukian on Why Canadians Can Trust the COVID Alert App
- Forget Link Licensing and Cross-Subsidies: When it Comes to Tech, Canada Should be Focused on Competition Law and Tax Policy
- How Can Linking to an Article be Immoral When the Media Source Itself Does the Posting?
- The Guilbeault Internet Plan: Leave it to the CRTC and Copyright Board of Canada to Get Money from Web Giants
- Four Million Downloads and Counting: Everyone Should Install the COVID Alert App