Columns

The Letters of the Law: The Year in Tech Law from A to Z

From the remarkable battle over the Stop Online Piracy Act to the massive public backlash against Internet surveillance in Canada, law and technology issues garnered headlines all year long. A look back at 2012 from A to Z: A is for Astral, the Canadian broadcasting giant that was to be […]

December 27, 2012 — 3 comments — Columns

The Tax-Free Six Step Approach to a Digital Economy Strategy

Several months ago in a speech to the Economic Club of Canada, Industry Minister Christian Paradis promised to unveil a Canadian digital economy strategy by the end of the year. Unless there is a late December surprise, however, 2012 will end in the same manner as every other year – with Canada as one of the only developed economies without a clear plan for success in the online environment.

The digital economy strategy file – dubbed the Penske file due to years of “work” with no results – now stands an unequivocal failure. Despite a public consultation on the issue and numerous models to emulate, the government has puzzlingly been unable to develop a coherent vision for Canada’s digital future.

The government could have pointed to any number of developments – copyright reform, anti-spam legislation, research tax credit changes, a pro-consumer approach at the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the forthcoming spectrum auction, and reversal of the hated Internet billing dispute – as evidence that it has been active on the issue. Yet without a clear map for the future, the efforts are understandably perceived to be a policy mish-mash without a clear target.

How to fix the digital economy strategy mess in a fiscal environment where there is little, if any, money available to pay for it? My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) points to a tax-free digital economy strategy that would have six components.

December 18, 2012 — 3 comments — Columns

Secrecy the Standard as Canada Enters Trans Pacific Partnership Talks

Despite growing opposition in Canada, the Canadian government has begun formal participation in the Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations, aimed at establishing one of the world’s most ambitious trade agreements. As nearly a dozen countries – including the United States, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Mexico and Vietnam – gathered in New Zealand last week for the 14th round of talks, skeptics here have already expressed doubts about the benefits of the proposed deal.

Canada has free-trade agreements with the United States, Mexico, Chile and Peru, leaving just six countries – currently representing less than 1 per cent of Canadian exports – as the net gain. Moreover, the price of entry may be high, since leaked documents suggest the deal might require a major overhaul of Canadian agriculture, investment, intellectual property and culture protection rules.

While the substance of the TPP is cause for concern, my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues the more immediate issue is the lack of transparency associated with both the negotiations and Canada’s participation in them. The talks remain shrouded in secrecy, with a draft text that is confidential; public interest groups are largely banned from the venue where the negotiations are being held.

December 12, 2012 — 8 comments — Columns

UN Internet Meeting About Who Pays, Not Who Rules

Should the Internet be treated like traditional phone services when it comes to regulation and pricing? That is the contentious question as the International Telecommunications Union, a United Nations agency with roots dating back to 1865 and the interconnection of telegraph services, meets in Dubai next week for the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT). The WCIT is a treaty-writing event that has attracted growing attention given fears that the ITU and countries such as Russia plan to use it to press for greater control over the Internet.

My weekly technology column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that there are certainly legitimate reasons for WCIT suspicion since the ITU lacks transparency and largely excludes public participation. For months, the ITU proposals scheduled for debate (known as International Telecommunications Regulations or ITRs) were shrouded in secrecy and the organization itself offered only limited opportunity for public participation. Moreover, some countries view the WCIT as an opportunity to increase their leverage over the Internet by proposing regulations that would increase governmental controls.

While these issues are cause for concern, proposals aimed at seizing control of Internet governance are unlikely to succeed and the reality is that governments already flex their regulatory muscles within the current U.S.-backed Internet governance framework.

The focus on a UN takeover of the Internet has obscured the real concern with the WCIT, namely efforts by telecom companies to find new sources of revenue by changing the way we pay for the Internet.

November 27, 2012 — 10 comments — Columns