News

07290067 by SumOfUs (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/wGpjox

Canadian Government Amends “Caretaker Rules” To Give Itself Power to Continue Negotiating TPP

This past weekend was a busy one politically as Canada was launched into a lengthy election campaign just as countries negotiating the latest round of Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations in Hawaii failed to conclude a deal. With reports that there may be a follow-up ministerial meeting within weeks, Canadian officials have been quick to claim that the election campaign will not interfere with the TPP trade talks.

To support the claim that the government is permitted to continue negotiating even when it is a “caretaker” government, the Privy Council Office yesterday released a document titled Guidelines on the Conduct of Ministers, Ministers of State, Exempt Staff and Public Servants During an Election. In previous elections, this document was not publicly released, leading Liberal MP Ted Hsu to table a motion in 2011 calling for its availability and to recent op-eds raising the same concern.

Why the sudden change of heart? Perhaps it has something to do with the desire to release this paragraph:

Read more ›

August 4, 2015 31 comments News
TPP rally. Ottawa, Canada, June 10 2014 by SumOfUs (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/o8zHmw

Is Canada Set to Cave on Copyright Term Extension in the TPP?

As the negotiations on the Trans Pacific Partnership continue in Hawaii, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has published a guest post I wrote on the implications of copyright term extension for Canada. The EFF has also launched a campaign urging Canadians to speak out on the issue. With Prime Minister Harper stating today that Canada “cannot be left out” of the TPP, it seems increasingly likely that the government will cave on copyright term extension in order to be part of the TPP.

The post states:

Read more ›

July 29, 2015 4 comments News
CBC Radio Canada - Vancouver by Tyler Ingram (CC BY-NC 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/7NujTF

CBC Seeks Takedown of Conservative Ad, Claims “No One” Can Re-Use Its News Clips Without Permission

Last week, the Conservative party posted an offensive advertisement on YouTube and Facebook titled Justin Trudeau on ISIS. The ad starts with ISIS music and images of prisoners about be drowned or beheaded before running short edited clips from a 13 minute interview with Trudeau and the CBC’s Terry Milewski. The advertisement has rightly generated a backlash with questions about whether it violates Bill C-51’s prohibitions on terrorist propaganda. Conservative Party campaign spokesman Kory Teneycke argues that it is little different than newscasts involving ISIS, but watching the combination of music and imagery, it clearly goes well beyond conventional news reporting on ISIS. Indeed, even if it fall short of violating Bill C-51, the ad is in terrible taste, treating images of victims as mere props for political gain.

Beyond the C-51 issue, the CBC waded into the issue late on Friday, as Jennifer McGuire, the CBC News Editor-in-Chief, posted a blog indicating that the broadcaster has asked YouTube and Facebook to take down the ad. The ostensible reason?  Copyright. The CBC has again raised the issue of re-use of news coverage in political advertising, claiming that it is determined to limit re-use since “our integrity as providers of serious, independent coverage of political parties and governments rests on this.” In light of this position, the CBC says its guiding principle is:

No one – no individual candidate or political party, and no government, corporation or NGO – may re-use our creative and copyrighted property without our permission. This includes our brands, our talent and our content.

Read more ›

June 29, 2015 48 comments News
Randy Bachman - 2009.01.12 by Stephen Dyrgas (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/5SbJ71

Guess Who Claims Canadian Music May Go Silent Without Another Copyright Extension?

The government’s gift to the recording industry wrapped up yesterday as Bill C-59 received royal assent and with it, the term of copyright for sound recordings was extended from 50 to 70 years. I’ve chronicled in detail how the extension of the copyright term without public consultation or discussion hurts Canadian consumers, reduces competition, and is a direct result of record label lobbying (surprise, cost to consumers, limited competition, reduced access to Canadian heritage, lobbying impact).

As an added bonus, groups have started to use the extension to argue that the government should also extend the term of copyright for authors from the current term of life plus an additional 50 years to life plus 70 years. Randy Bachman has an op-ed in the Globe and Mail today calling for a copyright term extension that must be read to be believed. The piece was not only a day late (he calls for the government to extend term in the same budget bill that already received royal assent), but contains some of the most absurd claims about copyright in recent memory.

Read more ›

June 24, 2015 14 comments News
Facebook by Franco Bouly (CC BY-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/6rk2Qf

B.C. Court of Appeal Rules Facebook’s Fine Print Trumps Privacy Law

One week after the B.C. Court of Appeal ruled that it could order Google to remove websites from its global index, the same court (but different judges) ruled that a privacy class action lawsuit against Facebook could not proceed in the province because the Facebook terms and conditions provide that all disputes must be resolved in a court in Santa Clara, California. The decision should provide a wake-up call to users and policy makers because an absolute approach to terms and conditions not only means that Canadian courts may be unable resolve consumer disputes involving companies like Facebook, but that Canadian law will not apply either.

The current Facebook terms and conditions state:

You will resolve any claim, cause of action or dispute (claim) you have with us arising out of or relating to this Statement or Facebook exclusively in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California or a state court located in San Mateo County, and you agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of such courts for the purpose of litigating all such claims. The laws of the State of California will govern this Statement, as well as any claim that might arise between you and us, without regard to conflict of law provisions.

While this appears to be slightly different from the terms that governed the dispute before the B.C. courts (it referenced courts in Santa Clara county), the key takeaway from the decision goes well beyond a proposed class action lawsuit over a Facebook “sponsored stories” program that no longer exists. The trial judge rightly noted that the heart of the case is whether online terms and conditions override domestic legal protections (in this case, the B.C. Privacy Act).

Read more ›

June 22, 2015 9 comments News