Bill C-34, the government’s Safe Social Media Act, was touted as its approach to online age verification, adding a mandated age check for social media account creation for those under-16 and age verification for under-18s for access to pornographic content, all overseen by a new Digital Safety Commission. But it now appears the government is prepared to let Bill S-209, Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne’s age verification and website-blocking bill, proceed alongside it, creating new complications with inconsistent definitions and expanded regulatory powers. Bill S-209, which I have warned about since its predecessor Bill S-210 and opposed before a Senate committee last fall, passed the Senate in April and received its first hour of second reading debate in the House of Commons last month. The Liberals previously opposed Bill S-210, citing privacy and freedom of expression concerns, but this time the government supported sending the bill to committee and the House has now referred it on division to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. The shift surprised even the bill’s sponsor, and it opens the door to a two-pronged regulatory model that doubles down on age verification, features inconsistent definitions of pornography, establishes a second penalty regime, and could give the future Digital Safety Commission the power to seek website-blocking orders.
Post Tagged with: "s-210"
Risky Business: The Legal and Privacy Concerns of Mandatory Age Verification Technologies
When the intersection of law and technology presents seemingly intractable new challenges, policy makers often bet on technology itself to solve the problem. Whether countering copyright infringement with digital locks, limiting access to unregulated services with website blocking, or deploying artificial intelligence to facilitate content moderation, there is a recurring hope the answer to the policy dilemma lies in better technology. While technology frequently does play a role, experience suggests that the reality is far more complicated as new technologies also create new risks and bring unforeseen consequences. So too with the emphasis on age verification technologies as a magical solution to limiting under-age access to adult content online. These technologies offer some promise, but the significant privacy and accuracy risks that could inhibit freedom of expression are too great to ignore.
The Hub runs a debate today on the mandated use of age verification technologies. I argue against it in a slightly shorter version of this post. Daniel Zekveld of the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada makes the case for it in this post.
Here We Go Again: Internet Age Verification and Website Blocking Bill Reintroduced in the Senate (With Some Changes)
The last Parliament featured debate over several contentious Internet-related bills, notably streaming and news laws (Bills C-11 and C-18), online harms (Bill C-63) and Internet age verification and website blocking (Bill S-210). Bill S-210 fell below the radar screen for many months as it started in the Senate and received only cursory review in the House. The bill faced only a final vote in the House but it died with the election call. This week, the bill’s sponsor, Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne, wasted no time in bringing it back. Now Bill S-209, the bill starts from scratch in the Senate with the same basic framework but with some notable changes that address at least some of the concerns raised by the prior bill (a fulsome review of those concerns can be heard in a Law Bytes podcast I conducted with Senator Miville-Dechêne).
The Year in Review: Top Ten Posts
Last week’s Law Bytes podcast featured a look at the year in review in digital law and policy. Before wrapping up for the year, the next three posts over the holidays will highlight the most popular posts, podcast episodes, and Substacks of the past year. Today’s post starts with the top posts, which starts with a major copyright ruling involving fair dealing and digital locks. The remaining posts include four posts on the Online Harms Act and two on Bill S-210, alongside posts on the implementation of Bills C-11, C-18, and the recent decision to ban TikTok from operating in Canada.
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 221: Inside My Canadian Heritage Committee Appearance on Freedom of Expression
The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage has for the past month been conducting a study on protecting freedom of expression. The counters of the study aren’t entirely clear. In fact, after I was invited to appear, I asked for some sense of what the committee was looking to address. There wasn’t much detail, which has really left it open for witnesses to cover whatever issues they like. I chose to focus my time on two issues: the expression implications of Canadian digital policy and the chilling effect of antisemitism. The two issues have really dominated my attention in recent months. Digital policy – including Bills C-11, C-18, C-63, and S-210 for years now and the antisemitism issues an enormous concern post October 7, 2023.
This week’s Law Bytes podcast takes the listener into the hearing room and the wide range of questions from Liberal, Conservative, and Bloc MPs my opening statement sparked.
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 282: Udbhav Tiwari on Why Signal May Exit Canada Over Bill C-22’s Encryption and Metadata Retention Rules 
From Making Web Giants Pay to Paying Media Giants: Budget 2026 Replaces the Government’s Internet Platform Strategy With $1.5 Billion in Taxpayer Dollars for Culture and News 
Has the Government Read Its Own Bill? What Three Days of House Debate Revealed About Bill C-34 Before the Committee Hearings Begin 
Surveillance By Design: Government Officials Say Lawful Access Could Reach Gaming Platforms, Daycares and AI Services 
Canada’s First Digital Trade Agreement: Why the Canada-EU Deal Will Likely Follow Europe’s Template and What That Means for Canadian Digital Law
