The only option that Bill C-32 offers creators is digital locks, which freezes current revenue streams for creators, and creates an illogical loophole in the copyright Bill by taking away the very rights the Bill grants to consumers in its other sections. Digital locks may work for software but they are not forward thinking and they are not popular with consumers. Digital locks are not a substitute for a clear revenue stream for creators.
Ontario Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian delivered the keynote address at an Ottawa privacy conference yesterday and used the opportunity to warn against lawful access legislation and express frustration with the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to let stand the Leon’s Furniture privacy case.
CIPPIC lawyer Tamir Israel has a great post debunking the form letters the government is sending in response to letters and emails expressing concern with lawful access.
Then-Industry Minister Tony Clement promised that the law would “protect Canadian businesses and consumers from harmful and misleading online threats,” but nearly a year later, my op-ed in the Hill Times (homepage version) notes the law is in limbo, the victim of an intense behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign that threatens to water-down the legislation such that Guerbuez, who maintains an active online presence, has publicly thanked the lobby groups for helping to keep him in business.
The spring election delayed the introduction of draft regulations for the anti-spam legislation, but since they were posted in early summer, lobby groups have used the process as an invitation to re-open the legislation and delay any implementation for months or even years.
We believe that copyright law should prohibit the circumvention of TPMs to a degree that would satisfy the World Intellectual Property Organization copyright treaties, but that would also provide for fair dealing, retail competition, security research, the protection of personal information, and accessibility for the disabled. Penalties for circumventing TPMs must apply only to cases of actual infringement. There is no merit in penalizing individuals who circumvent TPMs but do not distribute the unlocked materials or otherwise infringe on copyright in a fair-dealing context. The use of proprietary TPMs tied to reader or player devices must not be allowed to create an uncompetitive retail environment, or a retail environment in which Canadian content is only minimally visible or available to Canadian consumers.
What Is the Canadian Government Doing With Its Incoherent Approach to TikTok? 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 240: Dean Beeby on Why Canada’s Language Laws May Stop Government From Posting Access to Information Records Online 
Risky Business: The Legal and Privacy Concerns of Mandatory Age Verification Technologies 
Another Canadian Digital Policy Own Goal: Corporate TikTok Ban Leads to Millions in Lost Cultural Group Support 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 239: The Rise and Fall of Canada’s Digital Services Tax
Michael Geist
mgeist@uottawa.ca
This web site is licensed under a Creative Commons License, although certain works referenced herein may be separately licensed.
