Michael Geist

Latest Posts

The Devil is in the Details: How Bill C-30 Leaves Many Surveillance Questions Unanswered

The introduction of Bill C-30 has generated enormous public debate (I focused yesterday on the “voluntary” warrantless disclosure of subscriber information) but less discussed is how the bill leaves out many crucial details on the new surveillance rules will actually function. Indeed, for a bill that is ten years in the making, it is shocking how much is still unknown.

At the top of the uncertainty list are cost questions. The cost of new surveillance equipment could run into the tens of millions of dollars, yet the government has not said who will pay for it. Surveillance mandates in other countries have typically come with government support. For example, when the U.S. passed the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) in 1995, $500 million was granted to cover provider costs. In addition to the surveillance equipment costs, there are fees and costs associated with surveillance “hook-ups” to law enforcement as well as fees for disclosing subscriber information. Bill C-30 leaves these issues for another day by opening the door to fees but leaving specifics to future, unspecified regulations that can be passed by the Governor-in-Council without gaining Parliamentary approval.

Surveillance capability specifics are also still largely unknown.

February 21, 2012 — 18 comments — News

ACTA in Context: Copyright Enforcement on a Global Scale

Ars Technica features an article drawn from an interview I conducted with Tim Lee about how ACTA is part of a global effort to increase copyright enforcement on an international scale.

February 21, 2012 — Comments are Disabled — News

Bill C-30’s “Voluntary” Warrantless Disclosure Provision

The debate over Bill C-30, the online surveillance bill, has thus far focused on the mandatory disclosure of subscriber information, including name, address, email address, and IP address. The provision represents a significant change in the law, which currently allows ISPs to disclose such information but does not require them to do so. In response to the criticism, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has emphasized that the content of emails or web surfing habits would still require a warrant.

Yet Toews has not talked about a provision in Bill C-30 that creates a voluntary warrantless system that would allow police to ask for the content of emails or web surfing habits and allow ISPs to comply with the request without fear of liability. Section 487.0195 states the following:

February 20, 2012 — 27 comments — News

Telecom and Tech Coalition Calls on Government To Stop MicroSD Card Levy

The Wire Report reports that a coalition of telecom and technology companies that includes Telus and RIM have written to Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore and Industry Minister Christian Paradis to ask that cabinet implement a regulation to exempt the memory cards from the private copying levy. The Copyright Act gives cabinet the right to issue such exemptions. I wrote about this issue last November, asking whether the government would be willing to step in.

Interestingly, the article quotes David Basskin of the Canadian Private Copying Collective, who says that it would be unfair for the government to stop the process before the Copyright Board of Canada has heard the case. Basskin states “it’s manifestly unfair. We have a solid case to make, and we look forward to making it. The matter is, as you might say, ‘before the courts.’ The Copyright Board has the power of a court.”

content= mce_href=

February 20, 2012 — 8 comments — News

The Hidden Gag Order in Bill C-30

David Fraser has an excellent post on how Bill C-30 imposes a gag order on Internet providers who would be prohibited from disclosing disclosures of subscriber information to affected subscribers.

February 20, 2012 — 3 comments — News