Columns

The Battle Over Uber: Mapping Out a Regulatory Compromise

The very public fight over ride sharing services such as Uber was in the spotlight again last week as taxi drivers took to the streets in Toronto to protest against the ongoing availability of unregulated services. The result was a public relations nightmare: drivers comparing Uber to ISIS, engaging in dangerous activity with cars on the road, slowing the ability for an ambulance to arrive at its destination, and even injuring a police officer riding a bicycle.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that the hysterics are unlikely to generate much support from the public, but they do point to the need for local municipalities to address the festering policy issue. Uber and other ride sharing services are too popular among consumers to be banned. Nor should they be. The injection of new competition and innovation is good for the public, offering more consumer choice and new economic opportunities for drivers. Indeed, much of the demand for alternatives reflects frustration with poor service that can emerge in an artificially closed market.

December 15, 2015 — 5 comments — Columns

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) Regional Meeting for Europe 2014 by Open Government Partnership (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/nwzXXy

Why the Government’s Commitment to “Open by Default” Must Be Bigger Than Open Data

This week, I was pleased to participate in a joint initiative between the University of Ottawa’s Public Law Group and iPolitics to examine the government’s Speech from the Throne from many policy perspectives. This includes contributions from Professors Mendes, Morales, Oliver, Pal, Dodek, Forcese, Chalifour, and Cairns Way. My piece (iPolitics version, homepage version) focuses on the government’s commitment to “open by default”, which appears in all ministerial mandate letters. I note that the emphasis on open and transparent government in the Speech from the Throne was both welcome and unsurprising. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau campaigned on openness and transparency with impressive commitments to transform how Canadians access government information.

December 9, 2015 — 26 comments — Columns

Box Launch by David Bleasdale (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/An28qP

Government Docs Suggest Officials Thinking About Website Blocking, Targeting VPN Usage

The Trudeau government has thus far said very little about its plans for future digital and copyright policy reform. There were few references in its election platform and the ministerial mandate letters that identify immediate policy priorities did not speak to the issue.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that according to ministerial briefing documents recently released by the government, Canadian Heritage officials have told new minister Mélanie Joly that emerging issues may include targeting the use of virtual private networks and website blocking. The comments can be found in a departmental briefing for Joly on copyright policy, which includes a discussion titled “what’s next” for copyright.

December 8, 2015 — 28 comments — Columns

Betfair & PaddyPower by Jim Makos (CC BY-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/yjZYAJ

Quebec Law Would Violate First Rule of the Canadian Internet

If there is a first rule of the Internet in Canada, it is “thou shall not block.” Canadian Internet service providers face a wide range of policies that have implications for accessing content including net neutrality rules and the copyright notice-and-notice system. Yet in virtually all cases, blocking or removing content is simply not done (the lone exception is a limited, private sector led initiative to block child pornography images).

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that unlike other countries which have dabbled in mandated takedowns or Internet filtering, Canada has largely defended an “open Internet”. Canadian law does not mandate that Internet providers take down content due to unproven allegations of copyright infringement or allow them to alter or change content. In fact, the Telecommunications Act stipulates that “a Canadian carrier shall not control the content or influence the meaning or purpose of telecommunications carried by it for the public.”

December 2, 2015 — 16 comments — Columns

Paris November 2015 by Roberto Maldeno (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/Bd5BLe

What Now? Privacy and Surveillance in Canada After the Paris Attacks

As the world grapples with the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, the policy implications for issues such as the acceptance of refugees and continued military participation in the fight against ISIL have unsurprisingly come to the fore. The attacks have also escalated calls to reconsider plans to reform Canadian privacy and surveillance law, a key election promise from the Trudeau government.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues that despite the temptation to slow the re-examination of Canadian privacy and surveillance policy, the government should stay the course. The Liberals voted for Bill C-51, the controversial anti-terror law, during the last Parliament, but promised changes to it if elected. Even in the face of a renewed terror threat, those changes remain essential and should not have an adverse impact on operational efforts to combat terror threats that might surface in Canada.

November 27, 2015 — 6 comments — Columns