I appeared on The Digital Tattoo Podcast, on October 15, 2017.
In the episode, we talked about open access to “knowledge” and the copyright law in Canada, in consideration of Aaron Swartz.
I appeared on The Digital Tattoo Podcast, on October 15, 2017.
In the episode, we talked about open access to “knowledge” and the copyright law in Canada, in consideration of Aaron Swartz.
The ongoing furor over Netflix taxes remains one of oddest and most poorly understood public policy debates in recent memory. Part of the problem is that a “Netflix tax” has long been used to mean different things to different people. When first raised by the Conservative government, the issue had nothing to do with sales tax. Rather, a “Netflix tax” was a reference to a mandated contribution to help fund Canadian content, a position supported by various cultural groups and some provincial governments. The no-Netflix tax position took hold, however, and all three major parties adopted the position that they would not mandate contributions from online service providers such as Netflix.
More recently, the debate has shifted to Netflix tax as a sales tax with the goal of creating a “level playing field.” I tried to debunk the level playing field claims in this post and on Canadaland, but the claims of the need for a level playing field and sales tax continues. Yesterday, the NDP stated:
Canadian Heritage Minister Melanie Joly seemingly put the prospect of an Internet tax to bed when she launched her Creative Canada report last month. Throughout the year-and-a-half consultation, there were persistent rumours that an Internet tax was being considered as a mechanism to help fund Cancon. Yet when the Prime Minister rejected an Internet tax last June minutes after it was proposed by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, the policy initiative promoted by some cultural lobby groups seemed dead. Joly’s comments at her policy launched suggested much the same:
With security breaches regularly affecting millions (or even billions) of people, effective security breach disclosure rules are an essential part of a modern privacy law framework. It may surprise many to learn that Canada still does not have mandatory security breach disclosure rules that require companies to notify affected individuals in effect. Rules were passed in 2015, but the accompanying regulations were puzzlingly slow to emerge. The government finally released proposed regulations late in the summer with a consultation that closed earlier this week. My submission, which focused on implementation, content of notices, and proposed “indirect” notification, is posted below.
The Globe and Mail ran a masthead editorial yesterday that did not mince words with respect to Bell’s recent proposal calling on the Canadian government to support radical copyright reforms in NAFTA such as North America-wide mandatory website blocking and the full criminalization of copyright. Under the title, A Bad Idea for ‘Fixing’ Canada’s Internet Rules, the Globe argued that Bell’s plan “adds up to a frontal attack on online freedom.” Bell has earned the criticism, but it should also be noted that underlying its request were dubious claims about the state of Canadian piracy. Indeed, as Bell shifts its copyright position to mirror those promoted by the MPAA and RIAA, it seems ready to emulate age-old, discredited tactics that inaccurately seek to paint Canada as a piracy haven.