The Bell website blocking coalition has consistently argued their plan is similar to those found in other countries that have permitted website blocking. As I detailed in my lengthy series on the proposal, it is actually an outlier, since the absence of court orders for blocking puts it at odds with virtually every other country that insists on court orders as a matter of basic due process. The proposal is also a significant outlier in another important respect, however. In most countries, telecommunication providers oppose website blocking, consistent with longstanding and widely held views that they should act as neutral intermediaries that provide carriage rather than play a proactive role of blocking access to online content.
Archive for March 21st, 2018

Law Bytes
Episode 278: Ben Waldman on Gander Social and the Challenges of Building a Sovereign Social Network
byMichael Geist

August 10, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
The Missing Charter Statement: Why Hasn’t the Government Explained How Bill C-34’s Social Media Ban Complies with the Charter?
Three Years After October 7th: Living With the Shockwaves
What If the U.S. Demanded This? The Cloud Provider Conditions Behind Canada’s EU Digital Pivot
Ontario is Done Waiting for Universities to Act on Campus Antisemitism
Is Compromise on Encryption Possible? Why Bill C-22’s “Minor Opening” Leaves the Central Question Unanswered

