Columns

An Unofficial User Guide to This Afternoon’s Copyright Bill

With the copyright bill – Bill C-32 – being introduced this afternoon, it is worth noting that my technology law column last week (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focused on some of the key issues likely to find their way into the bill. The column noted the internal dynamics that led to the bill are by now fairly well known. Industry Minister Tony Clement, emboldened by last summer’s copyright consultation that generated unprecedented public participation, argued for a forward-looking, technology neutral bill with flexibility as a core principle. Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore advocated for a U.S.-style protectionist approach, with priority given to digital locks that can be used to limit copying, access, and marketplace competition.

With the active support of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Moore won the fight over digital locks and the new bill will feature provisions certain to please the U.S. government and lobby groups. Yet the bill will include far more than just tough legal protection for a digital locks.

This brief unofficial user's guide to the new legislation that focuses on three key issues – fair dealing, Internet provider liability, and digital locks (Internet downloading is unlikely to figure prominently in the bill).

June 2, 2010 — 19 comments — Columns

Security Breach Disclosure Bill Has Bark But No Bite

Last week Industry Minister Tony Clement unveiled two bills touted as important components of the government’s national digital strategy. The Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act is a repeat of the anti-spam bill that passed through the House of Commons last year but died after Parliament prorogued. Since the new bill reflects roughly the same compromise that garnered all-party support, it should receive swift passage.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues that the second bill, the Safeguarding Canadians' Personal Information Act, is likely to be far more controversial. The bill amends Canada’s existing privacy legislation by establishing new exceptions for businesses and new powers for law enforcement.

June 1, 2010 — 1 comment — Columns

Seven Copyright Questions for Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore

My op-ed in this week's Hill Times (HT version (sub req), homepage version) notes that with reports that a new copyright bill could be introduced this week, thousands of Canadians have been expressing concern with the government's plans, as there are mounting fears that the results from last summer's copyright consultation may be shelved in favour of a repeat of the much-criticized Bill C-61.

The foundational principle behind C-61 was the primacy of digital locks. When a digital lock (often referred to as digital rights management or technological protection measure) is used – to control copying, access or stifle competition – the lock supersedes virtually all other rights. The fight over the issue has pitted the tech-savvy Industry Minister Tony Clement, who has reportedly argued for a flexible implementation, against Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore, who has adopted what many view as an out-of-touch approach that would bring back the digital lock provisions virtually unchanged.

Moore has declined to comment on his position, but his approach raises some difficult questions:

May 25, 2010 — 56 comments — Columns

CRTC of Old Re-Emerges in Music Station Case

Taking pot shots at Canada’s national broadcast regulator has practically been a national sport for many years, as observers from across the political spectrum paint the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission as too interventionist, too luddite, too slow, or a combination of all of the above.

As my recent technology law column (forgotten with all the copyright activity – Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes, in recent years, the commission has worked to shed its negative reputation by increasingly adopting decisions that favour letting consumers and businesses decide broadcast winners and losers. For example, the recent fee-for-service decision promotes a negotiated settlement between broadcasters and cable companies with the CRTC betting that consumer expectations will provide sufficient incentive to ensure that local programming remains accessible to viewers.

May 19, 2010 — 11 comments — Columns

Digital Strategy Consultation’s Unasked Questions: Who Leads? Who Pays?

Last week Industry Minister Tony Clement unveiled the government’s much-anticipated Digital Economy Strategy consultation. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes the consultation is slated to run for two months and includes an online forum, face-to-face meetings, and a 40-page document that sets out key areas of concern. Five areas for discussion are identified: capacity to innovate, building a world-class digital infrastructure, growing the ICT industry, creating digital content, and building digital skills.

Skeptics will argue that the consultation is long overdue or perhaps even comes too late. Canada has inarguably lost considerable ground in comparison with many other countries around the world that were quicker to identify and implement digital strategies. While the delays have been marked by a gradual hollowing-out of the Canadian tech sector and sliding global rankings on network and wireless connectivity, Clement has firmly established himself as the most committed Industry Minister on digital issues since John Manley in the late 1990s.

Prioritizing digital issues is a first step toward remedying the situation, but a decade worth of policy neglect will not be solved overnight. Despite lingering doubts about whether the government is listening – many Canadians fear that last summer’s copyright consultation may be largely ignored – those concerned with Canada’s digital future can ill-afford to stay silent on the sidelines. I hope to address some of the substantive questions raised by the consultation in a future column, but the more immediate concern are two unasked questions that cut across all issues – who will lead the strategy and how will the government pay for it.

May 17, 2010 — 11 comments — Columns