Archive for June, 2019

November 24th 2008 - Graffiti by Stephen Poff https://flic.kr/p/5Earra (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

What is the Point of the Broadcast and Telecom Legislative Review if the Government Has Already Decided What It Intends To Do?

The Broadcast and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel released its interim report – What We Heard – yesterday alongside the long-overdue release of the written submissions to the panel. The report doesn’t contain any surprises given that the various positions on key telecom and broadcast issues are well known. While the panel is set to deliver its final report in January 2020, there is increasing reason to suspect that the government (if re-elected) has already decided what it wants to do.

Read more ›

June 27, 2019 2 comments News
Mind the gap by Kristian Dye (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/5JAk2X

Better Data, Better Results: Comparing the Gap Between the Copyright Review and Heritage Study on the Music Industry’s Policy Proposals

My recent series reviewing the Industry Committee’s copyright review (process, evidence, witness balance, citation) was about more that just why the decision to ignore the Canadian Heritage committee study on artist remuneration was justified. The series provides a data-backed assessment of the quality of the consultation of the respective committees, which is inextricably linked to their final recommendations. The better process is important because when comparing the recommendations from the two committees, the Industry committee consistently provided deeper analysis even in areas where there was agreement. The better analysis is not a coincidence: better process generates better policy and the Industry committee engaged in broader consultations in which it heard both from more creators and more users than Heritage.

Read more ›

June 26, 2019 4 comments News
citation needed by Dan4th Nicholas (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/8PEZiG

Ignoring the Evidence: Why the Copyright Review Was Right To Ignore the Canadian Heritage Committee Study, Part Four

My series on why the Industry committee was right to ignore the Canadian Heritage committee study as part of the national copyright review has previously discussed process (the government vested sole responsibility with the Industry committee), an examination of the witness and brief list that confirms that Industry conducted a much more comprehensive consultation that overlapped with much of Heritage but also included hundreds of additional witnesses and briefs, and the (im)balance among witnesses which indicates that the Industry committee made a greater effort to hear a wide range of perspectives consistent with the diverse views on copyright.

Read more ›

June 25, 2019 Comments are Disabled News
Huawei IDEOS U8150 by John Karakatsanis (CC BY-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/8ZRdpj

The LawBytes Podcast, Episode 17: What To Do About Huawei? – Christopher Parsons Unpacks One of Canada’s Most Challenging Policy Issues

What to do about Huawei? The Chinese telecom giant has emerged as one of Canada’s most challenging policy issues, raising concerns involving competition, communications, security, and trade not to mention kidnappings and arrests of corporate personnel. The government has repeatedly promised to articulate a policy on the use of Huawei equipment in Canada’s next generation wireless networks only to regularly delay doing so. Dr. Christopher Parsons, a senior research associate at the Citizen Lab, the world-famous cyber-security lab located at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto, joins the podcast to help sort through fact from fiction when it comes to Huawei.

Read more ›

June 24, 2019 3 comments Podcasts
Witness comparison by type - INDU vs. CHPC

Unbalanced Witness List: Why the Copyright Review Was Right To Ignore the Canadian Heritage Committee Study, Part Three

My series on why the Industry committee was right to ignore the Canadian Heritage committee study as part of the national copyright review has focused on process (the government vested sole responsibility with the Industry committee, its clear assertion as the authoritative copyright review, and an examination of the witness and brief list that confirms that Industry conducted a much more comprehensive consultation that overlapped with much of Heritage but also included hundreds of additional witnesses and briefs.

Read more ›

June 21, 2019 3 comments News