The first post in this series on Bill C-18, the Online News Act, focused on the problematic approach to what constitutes “making news content available”, as it encompasses everything from indexing to linking to news stories without reproducing the actual text. The approach raises serious risks to the free flow of information online and expands the law far beyond reasonable expectations of what “use” of news articles might mean. But the problems with expansive definitions in the bill are not limited to the “making available” provision. Bill C-18’s definitions for “news content”, “news business”, and “news outlet” are also exceptionally broad, raising their own series of concerns.
Post Tagged with: "online news act"
Why the Online News Act is a Bad Solution to a Real Problem, Part One: The Risk to Free Flow of Information
Since its introduction in early April, the Online News Act (Bill C-18) has flown below the public’s radar screen. There have been a few op-eds and considerable coverage on my blog (I’ve posted here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and released podcasts on the bill with Sue Gardner and independent digital media publishers Farhan Mohamed and Jeff Elgie) but Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has largely been content to rush the bill through the parliamentary process with little debate. In fact, after Rodriguez left the CBC’s Vassy Kapelos visibly puzzled, he has said little about it. He has never given a speech on the bill in the House of Commons and the government successfully cut off debate after allocating just two hours to it. Bill C-18 is now headed to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage with hearings that could start as soon as the end of this week.
This post marks the first in a lengthy series that explain why the bill is a bad solution to a real problem. The series starts with posts that examine some of the specifics in the bill, including problematic definitions for making available news, news businesses, and even the definition of news itself. Once I’ve laid the foundation, the series will highlight some of the implications of the bill, including breaches of Canada’s international trade, treaty, and constitutional obligations; the risk it will hamper efforts to combat misinformation; and the plethora of market problems it would create related to government interference, an independent press, competition, and our dependence on big tech.
The Missing Bill C-18 Charter Statement: Why Did the Justice Department Remove the Document Confirming the Online News Act Includes Payments for Internet Linking?
Last Tuesday, Justice Minister David Lametti tabled his department’s Charter statement for Bill C-18, the Online News Act. A link to the statement appeared briefly on the department’s website, but by the end of the week reference to the Bill C-18 Charter statement was removed from the Justice site altogether. As of this morning, there is still no reference to the statement, even though it is a public document having been tabled in the House of Commons. In fact, I have now obtained a copy of the Charter statement and posted it publicly here with an embed below. The department will presumably re-post the statement at some point and it would be useful to confirm that it remains unchanged and provide an explanation for the online removal (I asked and did not get a response). [UPDATE: Hours after this blog post went live, the government posted the Charter statement.]
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 129: Farhan Mohamed and Jeff Elgie on Why Canadian Independent News Publishers Want the Government to Fix the Online News Act
In the two months since the Online News Act was introduced it has received limited coverage and sparked little debate. Last week, Bill C-18 began to attract attention as over 125 small and medium sized Canadian publishers began to sound the alarm, calling on the government to fix the bill by addressing concerns around fairness and transparency. Farhan Mohamed of Overstory Media and Jeff Elgie of Village Media are two of Canada’s most successful and innovative local digital publishers, operating in dozens of communities across Canada. Both signed onto the initiative and join the Law Bytes podcast to discuss their business models, relationships with the Internet platforms, and concerns with the Online News Act.
No Comment: Government Moves to End Debate on Online News Bill Despite a No-Show from Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez
Since its introduction in the House of Commons last month, the Online News Act (Bill C-18) has been debated or discussed just once. The bill was tabled without comment by Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez on April 5th. Thus far, Friday, May 13th was the only one day devoted debate on the bill at second reading, a day when so many MPs were not present that there was a question on whether there was sufficient quorum to proceed. Rodriguez did not deliver a speech or answer questions that day, leaving it to his Parliamentary Secretary Chris Bittle, who I pointed out inaccurately characterized the requirement for payments by Internet platforms as “use” of content and implausibly argued that the bill involved “minimal government intervention.” There has been a total of less than two hours of speeches and debate with just 10 MPs speaking to the bill or asking questions (Bittle and Mark Gerretsen being the only Liberal MPs).
Recent Posts
A Post I Never Thought I Would Need to Write: Jewish Students Have the Right to Feel Safe on Campus 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 203: Andrew Clement on Calls to Separate Privacy Reform and Artificial Intelligence Regulation in Bill C-27 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 202: David Soberman on the Reality Behind Claims Canadian Wireless Prices Have Been Cut in Half 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 201: Robert Diab on the Billion Dollar Lawsuits Launched By Ontario School Boards Against Social Media Giants 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 200: Colin Bennett on the EU’s Surprising Adequacy Finding on Canadian Privacy Law
