The Bell website blocking coalition cites privacy protection as a reason to support its plan, noting the privacy risks that can arise from unauthorized streaming sites. There are obviously far better ways of protecting user privacy from risks on the Internet than blocking access to sites that might create those risks, however. Further, with literally millions of sites that pose some privacy risk, few would argue that the solution lies in blocking all of them. In fact, the privacy argument is not only weak, it is exceptionally hypocritical. Bell is arguably the worst major Canadian telecom company on user privacy and its attempt to justify website blocking on the grounds that it wants to protect privacy is not credible.
Archive for March 1st, 2018
The Case Against the Bell Coalition’s Website Blocking Plan, Part 12: Increasing Privacy Risks for Canadians
Fair Dealing Support for News Reporting and Public Debate: The Case of Warman and National Post v. Fournier
Having examined the importance of fair dealing for creators and freedom of expression, the fair dealing week posts continue with fair dealing and its support for news reporting and public debate. In recent months, some news organizations have taken aim at fair dealing, arguing that it is a detriment to […]