Appeared in the Toronto Star on April 26, 2014 as What Would You Do If You Could Hit the Reset Button on TV Regulation? The Broadcasting Act is a complex statute that lists more than twenty broadcasting policy goals. Yet for decades, Canadian policy has largely boiled down to a […]
Articles by: Michael Geist
Different Regulations, Different Regulators: Behind Canada’s Net Neutrality Advantage
Last week, many in the Internet community were outraged by a U.S. Federal Communications Commission proposal that would significantly undermine net neutrality. The commentary on the (still unpublished) U.S. proposal says it all – The FCC’s New Net Neutrality Proposal is Even Worse Than You Think, Is Net Neutrality Dying, How Open Will the FCC’s ‘Open Internet’ Really Be?, Goodbye, Net Neutrality: Hello, Net Discrimination, and Net Neutrality Dead for Good?. The FCC responded with its own post that did little to assuage the concerns, stating that the U.S. rules will propose:
1. That all ISPs must transparently disclose to their subscribers and users all relevant information as to the policies that govern their network;
2. That no legal content may be blocked; and
3. That ISPs may not act in a commercially unreasonable manner to harm the Internet, including favoring the traffic from an affiliated entity.
Transparency and no legal blocking are hold overs from the earlier Open Internet order. The third issue is where net neutrality would be harmed as the FCC is proposing to shift toward a “commercially unreasonable” standard for treating similar content in different ways. That approach would certainly permit paid prioritization, where deep pocketed content owners could pay to have their content sent on a fast lane, while everyone else is stuck on the slow lane. Moreover, given that the earlier Open Internet order was struck down by a U.S. court, even transparency and content blocking presently fall through the cracks.
Given the widespread attention to the U.S. developments, many have been asking about the impact in Canada.
Government Buries Massive Trademark Overhaul in Budget Implementation Bill
It started innocuously enough with the House of Commons Committee on Industry, Science and Technology releasing its long-awaited report on intellectual property in Canada in March 2013. The report included a recommendation that Canada ratify several international patent and trademark treaties, which came as a surprise (particularly to opposition members of parliament) since no witness had raised the issue before the committee.
Within weeks, the government accepted the recommendation and one year later it moved to ratify the treaties with scant debate or discussion. Yet the ratification of five intellectual property treaties about which few Canadians have ever heard and that seem certain to increase fees for business was only the start.
Indeed, earlier this month, the government quietly included provisions in the budget implementation bill that will radically overhaul Canadian trademark law. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes those changes have not been subject to any serious debate, discussion or public consultation.
Government Buries Massive Trademark Overhaul in Budget Implementation Bill
Appeared in the Toronto Star on April 19, 2014 as Trademark Overhaul Promises to Please No One It started innocuously enough with the House of Commons Committee on Industry, Science and Technology releasing its long-awaited report on intellectual property in Canada in March 2013. The report included a recommendation that […]
Why the Government’s New Digital Privacy Act Puts Your Privacy at Risk
Appeared in the Toronto Star on April 12, 2014 as Why the Government’s New Digital Privacy Act Puts Your Privacy at Risk After years of false starts, Industry Minister James Moore last week unveiled the Digital Privacy Act, the long-awaited reform package of Canada’s private sector privacy law. While the […]