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.
Archive for June 26th, 2019
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
- How Can Linking to an Article be Immoral When the Media Source Itself Does the Posting, Part 2: A Day in the Life of the Toronto Star on Facebook
- 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