Law Bytes

Consumer frustration with just about everything associated with Canadian communications services is well known. The list of concerns is long: high prices, contracts that lock in consumers but not providers, gaming prices to make comparison shopping difficult, and confusing consumer codes among them. As politicians have begun to take notice, the CRTC has suddenly become more active with several consultations and new consumer focused initiatives. My colleague Marina Pavlović, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, has been at the forefront of consumer rights law and communications services for many years. She joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the ongoing consumer challenges and the latest CRTC developments.

The recent announcement of a Canadian government decision to ban the corporate offices of TikTok but leave the app untouched has left many puzzled since the approach may actually make matters worse. The potential privacy and security risks associated with the app will remain but the ability to hold the company accountable will be weakened. While the government has downplayed the impact of the decision, the reality is that a TikTok exit from Canada will have an impact on Canadian digital creators. This Law Bytes podcast breaks down the implications, including a discussion with Scott Benzie, the Executive Director of Digital First Canada, who identifies the digital creator concerns. The podcast can be downloaded here, accessed on YouTube, and is embedded below. Subscribe to the podcast via Apple Podcast, Google Play, Spotify or the RSS feed. Updates on the podcast on Twitter at @Lawbytespod. Credits: CBC News, Ottawa Bans TikTok’s Canadian Operations - But Not the App, November 7, 2024

The Online Harms Act or Bill C-63 was introduced last February after years of false starts, public consultations, and debates. Months later, the bill appears to be stalled in the House of Commons and has yet to make it to committee for further study. Some view that as a win, given their criticism of the bill, though others who have waited years for action against online harms are beginning to fear that the Parliamentary clock is working against them. Emily Laidlaw, the Canada Research Chair in Cybersecurity at the University of Calgary and Taylor Owen, the Beaverbrook Chair in Media, Ethics and Communications at the Max Bell School of Public Policy at McGill University, have both been actively engaged in this issue for years, including their participation on the government’s expert advisory group. They join the Law Bytes podcast to discuss where things stand on Bill C-63 and the steps they recommend to get the bill back on track for study and debate.

It has been many years since the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal captured headlines. The services at the heart of the case no longer exist, but the legal case in Canada continues to march on. Last month, the Federal Court of Appeal overturned a lower court decision that had largely sided with Facebook. In its place, it released a new decision that includes and analysis of reasonableness under the Canadian privacy law and engages with the notion of a potential trust but verify standard in some cases when data is transferred to third parties. The case may not be over yet, but the latest decision has big implications for privacy in Canada. David Fraser, one of Canada’s leading privacy practitioners with McInnes Cooper and the creator a popular Youtube channel on privacy law, joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide the background on the case, assess the key findings, and consider what may come next.

For over 25 years, the World Trade Organization, an intergovernmental organization based in Geneva, Switzerland that regulates and facilitates international trade, has grappled with how to engage with e-commerce. What started as a moratorium on customs duties has expanded into the development of a new agreement that touches on a wide range of issues including privacy, data localization, and electronic contracting. The new deal has been heralded as groundbreaking, but some aren’t fully convinced that it actually does break new ground. Patrick Leblond is a University of Ottawa professor in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs where he specializes in economic governance and policy, with a focus on North America, Europe and, increasingly, China. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the latest developments and assess the potential impact of the WTO’s new e-commerce agreement.

This podcast drops on Monday, October 7th, the one-year anniversary of the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. I’ve largely kept the issue the rising tide of antisemitism since the Hamas terrorist attacks off the Law Bytes podcast, but those that follow my work will know that I have been vocal on social media and the mainstream media expressing my shock and concern. This episode blends my professional focus on digital policy with my personal concerns regarding antisemitism. The alarming rise of antisemitism over the past year has left many - myself included - in shock. I see it in my social media mentions and on popular sites such as Wikipedia, where it has cropped up on entries involving issues like Zionism and even in the targeting of groups like the Anti-Defamation League. Wikipedia’s antisemitism problem may not have come as a surprise to Professor Jan Grabowski, a professor of Holocaust studies at the University of Ottawa. He conducted a detailed study on the issue in 2023 which focused on the Holocaust page involving Poland, his area of expertise. Professor Grabowski joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about his work, his Wikipedia study, and the threat of disinformation on the site.

Questions about trust in the media have escalated in Canada in recent months as with each error or questionable tweet, there is seemingly an inevitable chorus of concerns that raise doubts about the implications of government regulation and funding of the media. So where is the Online News Act at right now? What of the new collective designed to distribute the $100 million that Google agreed to pay in return for an exemption from mandated arbitration? And what can be done about the mounting trust deficit? Erin Millar wears several hats including as the CEO & Co-founder of Indiegraf and the interim board chair of the Canadian Journalism Collective, the collective that was picked by Google to administer the $100 million distribution. She joins the Law Bytes podcast in a personal capacity to talk about the latest Bill C-18 developments and what measures might help address trust in Canadian media.

Bill S-210, the controversial age verification bill which purports to limit access to pornography for those under 18, could be headed for a final vote of approval in the House of Commons within the next couple of weeks. Much of the concern with the bill has focused on the privacy and free speech implications of mandating the technology and opening the door to website blocking. Yet often missing from the debate has been a deeper, more nuanced examination of pornography including distinctions between unlawful and so-called awful but lawful content, the role and responsibility of pornography platforms, and alternatives to the S-210 reliance on blocking and age verification technologies. That gap in the debate has now been filled by Professor Elaine Craig of the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University in her new book, Mainstreaming Porn. Professor Craig joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the book, the massive influence of porn platforms, the problems with Bill S-210, and the legal mechanisms she thinks would best address the issue .

Parliament resumes after a summer break today. While digital policies receded into the background over the past few months, the political intrigue of by-elections and a minority government without an NDP deal will be accompanied by questions about what happens to Bill C-63, Canada’s online harms bill, Bill C-27, the privacy and AI reform bill, Bill S-210, the age verification bill, and a myriad of other regulatory and policy issues. Matt Hatfield is Executive Director of Open Media, one of Canada’s leading digital rights organizations. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to break down where things stand and what other digital policies may command attention.

The Law Bytes podcast is back with a deep dive into a high profile case coming out of Brazil, where Twitter or X has been under a blocking order this month. Not only is the service blocked, but individuals face significant fines if they try to circumvent the order to access the service by using a VPN. The case raises many questions about enforcing domestic laws, political and tech power, and the impact on individual rights and freedoms. Carlos Affonso Souza is a law professor at the State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) and PUC-Rio, where he specializes in Law and Technology. He is the co-founder and Director of Institute for Technology and Society of Rio de Janeiro (ITS Rio). He joins me on the podcast to discuss the case and its implications.

The battle over a digital services tax has been the subject of Law Bytes podcast episodes for several years as the Canadian government signalled its intent to move ahead with one even as US officials warned of risks of trade retaliation if they did so outside of an international framework. With the DST now in effect, what does trade law have to say and how might the US respond? Meredith Lilly is a full Professor and Simon Reisman Chair in International Economic Policy at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. She joins me on the podcast to discuss the current digital trade policy tensions, what our agreements say about complaints and retaliation, as well as explain why a U.S. response on at least the DST seems likely.

It isn’t news that the Canadian news sector is broken: the Online News Act has caused more harm the good, the dependence on government funding and regulation has grown dramatically and undermined public trust, and implementing Bill C-18 has become mired in controversy. Peter Menzies spent three decades as a working journalist and newspaper executive, most notably with the Calgary Herald where he served as its editorial page editor, editor in chief and, finally, publisher. He then spent another 10 years at the CRTC, including four as Vice Chair of Telecommunications. Peter been one of the most prominent voices on the state of the news sector in Canada and he joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss recent developments alongside proposed reforms that might do a better job of addressing mounting concerns over the independence of the press.

The recent CRTC Bill C-11 decision mandating that streaming services pay 5 percent of their revenues has left seemingly everyone unhappy and sparked multiple legal challenges. While much of the focus has been on video streaming, music was a core part of Bill C-11 and the implications for music streaming services may be the most pronounced. Will Page is the perfect person to unpack these issues. He is the author of the critically acclaimed book Tarzan Economics, the former Chief Economist of Spotify and PRS for Music, the co-host the Bubble Trouble podcast and a regular contributor to BBC, Financial Times, and The Economist. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide new data on what the CRTC’s numbers mean and why the decision could ultimately move the Canadian market backwards rather than forward.

Parliament adjourned for the summer last week, meaning both the House of Commons and Senate are largely on hold until mid-September. The Law Bytes podcast focuses intensively on Canadian legislative and digital policy developments and with another Parliamentary year in the books, this week’s episode takes a look back and take stock of where things stand. It features discussion on the implementation of the Internet streaming and news bills (C-11 and C-18) as well as an analysis of the current state of privacy, AI, online harms, and digital tax as found in Bills C-27, C-63, C-69, S-210 and C-27.

The question of copyright and digital locks – technically referred to as anti-circumvention legislation – dates back more than 25 years with creation of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Internet Treaties and later in Canada with the enactment of the Copyright Modernization Act. The full scope and application of those digital lock rules has been the subject of considerable debate, particularly over how fair dealing fits into the equation. The Federal Court of Canada recently issued a landmark decision on the issue which concludes that digital locks should not trump fair dealing. CIPPIC, the University of Ottawa’s public interest technology law clinic, raised the key arguments on the issue in an intervention in the case led by James Plotkin, a partner with the law firm Gowlings, and David Fewer, CIPPIC’s Director and General Counsel. They join the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the ruling and to clear up some of the misinformation that has been circulating since its release.

Last week, the CRTC released its much-anticipated Bill C-11 ruling on the initial mandated contributions from Internet streaming services. While the government focused on the requirement to contribute 5% of Canadian revenues, a closer look revealed the CRTC largely ignored industry data and the actual contributions from Internet streaming services and seemed entirely unconcerned by the effects on competition and consumer costs. Len St-Aubin is the former Director General of Telecommunications Policy at Industry Canada and played a role in the development of both the Broadcasting Act and Telecommunications Act. He provided consulting services to Netflix until 2020 and has since been an active participant in the debate on Internet policy. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the CRTC ruling, the state of TV and film production in Canada, and what may lie ahead for the streamers, creators, and consumers.

Bill S-210, the mandated age verification bill for pornography sites that in reality targets everything from Google Search to Netflix, was expected to be the subject of extensive hearings by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. But after a Conservative filibuster, it appears that there will be only one hearing and that the bill will be reported back to the House unamended. Before that vote, this week’s Law Bytes podcast offers up a “what could have been” hearing on the bill. It features my mock opening statement alongside responses to some of the actual questions raised by MPs on issues such as privacy, website blocking, and poorly defined terms in the bill.

Bill C-27, Canada’s proposed privacy reform and AI regulation bill, continues to slowly work its way through the committee process at the House of Commons with the clause-by-clause review of the AI portion of the bill still weeks or even months away. Recently a group of nearly 60 leading civil society organizations, corporations, experts and academics released an open letter calling on the government to separate the bill into two. Andrew Clement has been an important voice in that group as he tracked not only the committee hearings but also dug into the consultation process surrounding the bill. Clement is a Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Information at the University of Toronto, where he coordinates the Information Policy Research Program and co-founded the Identity Privacy and Security Institute (IPSI). He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about AI regulation in Canada, concerns with the bill, and offers insights into the legislative and consultative process.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently claimed that “we’ve cut the cost of cell phone plans in half since 2019 - in part by increasing competition.” Is that true? What is the real state of Canadian wireless competition and how does pricing compare with other countries? To help answer those questions, this week David Soberman, a Professor of Marketing at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto and the Canadian National Chair of Strategic Marketing joins the Law Bytes podcast. Professor Soberman’s research is focused on understanding how the operation of markets is affected by the exchange of information between organizations and customers, relationships within the distribution channel and the introduction of innovations to markets.

Concerns about the impact of social media on youth have been brewing for a long time, but in recent months a new battleground has emerged: the courts, who are home to lawsuits launched by school boards seeking billions in compensation and demands that the social media giants change their products to better protect kids. Those lawsuits have now come to Canada with four Ontario school boards recently filing claims. Robert Diab is a professor of law at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, British Columbia. He writes about constitutional and human rights, as well as topics in law and technology. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide a comparison between the Canadian and US developments, a deep dive into alleged harms and legal arguments behind the claims, and an assessment of the likelihood of success.

A little over five years ago, I launched the Law Bytes podcast with an episode featuring Elizabeth Denham, then the UK’s Information and Privacy Commissioner, who provided her perspective on Canadian privacy law. I must admit that I didn’t know what the future would hold for the podcast, but I certainly did not envision reaching 200 episodes. I think it’s been a fun, entertaining, and educational ride. I’m grateful to the incredible array of guests, to Gerardo Lebron Laboy, who has been there to help produce every episode, and to the listeners who regularly provide great feedback. The podcast this week goes back to where it started with a look at Canadian privacy through the eyes of Europe. It flew under the radar screen for many, but earlier this year the EU concluded that Canada’s privacy law still provides an adequate level of protection for personal information. The decision comes as a bit of surprise to many given that Bill C-27 is currently at clause-by-clause review and there has been years of criticism that the law is outdated. To help understand the importance of the EU adequacy finding and its application to Canada, Colin Bennett, one of the world’s leading authorities on privacy and privacy governance, joins the podcast.

The Online Harms Act – otherwise known as Bill C-63 – is really at least three bills in one. The Law Bytes podcast tackled the Internet platform portion of the bill last month in an episode with Vivek Krishnamurthy and then last week Professor Richard Moon joined to talk about the return of Section 13 of the Canada Human Rights Act. Part three may the most controversial: the inclusion of Criminal Code changes that have left even supporters of the bill uncomfortable. Boris Bytensky of the firm Bytensky Shikhman has been a leading Canadian criminal law lawyer for decades and currently serves as President of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association. He joins the podcast to discuss the bill’s Criminal Code reforms as he identifies some of the practical implications that have thus far been largely overlooked in the public debate.

The public debate surrounding Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act, has focused primarily on Human Rights Act and Criminal Code reforms. The Human Rights Act changes include the return of Section 13 on hate speech, which was repealed by the Harper government after criticisms that it unduly chilled freedom of expression. To help understand the history of Section 13 and its latest iteration, this week Professor Richard Moon, Distinguished University Professor and Professor of Law at the University of Windsor joins the Law Bytes podcast. The Canadian Human Rights Commission asked Professor Moon to conduct a study on Section 13 in 2008 and his report is the leading source on its history and application. In this episode, we discuss that history and consider the benefits and risks of inserting it into Bill C-63.

New legislation making its way through the U.S. Congress has placed a TikTok ban back on the public agenda. The bill – which would lead to either a divestiture or ban – has passed the House of Representatives and is now headed to the Senate. On the Canadian front, TikTok is already prohibited on government devices at the federal level alongside some provinces, the government has quietly conducted a national security review, and there are new calls to ban it altogether from the Canadian market. Anupam Chander is a law professor at Georgetown University and leading expert on the global regulation of new technologies. He joined the Law Bytes podcast several years ago when a TikTok ban was raised by the Trump Administration and he returns this week to discuss the latest developments and their broader implications.

The federal government has struggled to update Canadian privacy laws over the past decade, leaving the Supreme Court as perhaps the leading source of privacy protection. In 2014, the court issued the Spencer decision, which affirmed a reasonable expectation of privacy in basic subscriber information and earlier this month it released the Bykovets decision, which extends the reasonable expectation of privacy to IP addresses. Vibert Jack is the litigation director of the BC Civil Liberties Association, which successfully intervened in the case. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to examine the case, including the evolution of Canadian law, the court's analysis, and the implications of Bykovets for Internet privacy in Canada.

The Online Harms Act is the culmination of years of public debate over whether – or how – the government should establish a regulatory framework for Internet platforms in dealing with online harms. Bill C-63 is already attracting considerable controversy, particularly over proposed changes to the Criminal Code and the Human Rights Act. To help unpack the bill, Vivek Krishnamurthy, an Associate Professor at the University of Colorado Law School, joins this week’s Law Bytes podcast. Vivek is a former colleague and Director of the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic and he served as a Commissioner on the Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression and was a member of the government’s Expert Panel on Online Harms.

Twenty years ago today the Supreme Court of Canada released CCH Canadian v. Law Society of Upper Canada, a decision that stands as perhaps the most consequential in Canadian copyright law history as it would firmly establish fair dealing as a users right and serve as the foundation for copyright law in Canada for decades to come. Leading off the hearing several months earlier for the Law Society was Scott Jolliffe, an IP litigator with the law firm Gowlings. Jolliffe was charged with arguing the fair dealing aspects of the case, but it was only at last moment that users right entered the picture. To mark its 20th anniversary, Jolliffe joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the CCH case, his strategy and insights from the hearing, and his thoughts on its impact many years later.

The government plans to introduce the Online Harms Act later today, bringing forward long-delayed legislation that will include new responsibilities and liabilities for Internet platforms alongside an extensive complaints and enforcement governance structure. What is likely to be Bill C-63 will focus on protecting children online and will be the most contentious of the government’s Internet regulation bills given the challenge of balancing safeguards with freedom of expression. This week’s Law Bytes podcast features a combined backgrounder and preview of the bill as I walk through the years of failed consultations, expert panels, changing ministers, and challenges in bringing it forward, highlight the key issues at stake, and contrast the online harms bill with Bill S-210, which seems destined to share the spotlight.

Bill C-26, alternately described as a cyber-security, critical infrastructure or telecom bill, remains largely below the radar screen despite its serious implications for privacy, expression, and affordable network access. The bill is currently being studied at a House of Commons committee that seems more interested in partisan political gamesmanship rather than substantive hearings. Kate Robertson is lawyer and senior research associate at the Citizen Lab in the Munk School at the University of Toronto who is a former criminal counsel and the co-author of one of the most extensive Bill C-26 committee submissions. She appeared last week at the committee studying the bill, but with limited opportunity to engage on the issues, she joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the bill, the concerns it raises, and some of the potential fixes.

European countries reached agreement late last week on a landmark legislative package to regulate artificial intelligence. AI regulation has emerged as a key issue over the past year as the explosive growth of ChatGPT and other generative AI services have sparked legislation, lawsuits and national consultations. The EU AI Act is heralded as the first of its kind and as a model for Canadian AI rules. Luca Bertuzzi is a Brussels-based tech journalist who was widely regarded as the leading source of information and analysis about the unfolding negotiations involving the EU AI Act. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to explain the EU process, the ongoing opposition by some countries, and the future steps for AI regulation in Europe.

I’ve described Bill S-210, the Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act, as the most dangerous Internet bill you’ve never heard of as it contemplates measures that raise privacy concerns, website blocking, and extend far beyond pornography sites to include search and social media. The bill started in the Senate and having passed there is now in the House of Commons, where MPs voted in favour of it at second reading and sent it to committee for further study. Senator Julie Mivelle-Dechêne is the chief architect and lead defender of the bill. A former Radio-Canada broadcaster who was appointed to the Senate by Justin Trudeau in 2018, she joins the Law Bytes podcast to debate her bill as she provides her rationale for it and defends against the criticism and concerns it has sparked.

Canadian digital law and policy in 2023 was marked by so many legislative battles that you needed a scorecard to keep track: Bill C-11 on online streaming, Bill C-18 on online news, and Bill C-27 on privacy and AI were the headliners, but there were notable developments on content regulation, competition, and a digital services tax. For this final Law Bytes podcast of 2023, I go solo without a guest to talk about the most significant developments in Canadian digital policy from the past year and to think a bit about what may lie ahead in 2024.

The CRTC just concluded a three week hearing on Bill C-11 with its primary focus on the prospect of mandating interim payments by Internet streaming services. The result was predictable as just about everyone made their way to Gatineau to make their case for cash. I appeared for the first time before the CRTC where argued that it should prioritize competition, consumer choice and affordability, recognizing that the emerging system brings with it risks of market exit or higher prices. This week’s Law Bytes episode goes inside the Commission hearing for my opening statement and exchanges with the panel of Commissioners.

The Canadian government tried to salvage the Online News Act last week as its struck a deal with Google that will bring in $100 million to support the news sector and remove concerns about blocked news links. The government had to overhaul its own law in order to reach the agreement, tossing aside most of the core elements in favour of a fund-style single payment from Google. The reaction to the agreement from the news sector has been mixed at best with relative silence from many supporters and outright opposition from the likes of Torstar. So what to make the of the deal and what comes next? Jeff Elgie is the CEO of Village Media, one of the largest independent, digital-only news outlets in Canada. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to walk though his participation in the process, reaction to the agreement, and thoughts for the future.

For many years, Canadians have lamented the state of competition for Internet broadband services, pointing to concerns regarding price and lack of choice. Earlier this month, the CRTC seemed to agree, admitting in a decision involving competitive access that it is “important that the Commission revise its approach to promote competition and protect the interests of Canadians.” Andy Kaplan-Myrth is Vice-President, Regulatory and Carrier Affairs at TekSavvy, one of the few remaining independent competitors in Canada. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the current state of competition, the recent CRTC decision, and what this might mean for the Canadian market.

The much-anticipated Bill C-11 hearing opens this week at the CRTC. For the next three weeks, the Commission will hear from a wide range of stakeholders, including digital and legacy creators, Internet giants, telecom companies, and consumer groups. This hearing, which builds on an earlier consultation on registration requirements, will address issues that include mandated Internet streaming company contributions and discoverability requirements. What brought us to this moment and what lies ahead? This week’s Law Bytes podcast reviews the lengthy legislative process, the key players at the hearings, and how this consultation fits within the broader Bill C-11 framework.

Is the Canadian government’s Internet legislation constitutional? That question arose during the hearings on Bills C-11 and C-18, but has taken on a new urgency given the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision involving an Alberta challenge to federal environmental assessment legislation. With limits on federal powers back in the spotlight, the vulnerability of the legislation requires further examination. Philip Palmer is a former Justice lawyer who appeared before the House of Commons committee studying Bill C-11 to make the case that the law does not fall within the scope of federal powers. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to explain why and what it might mean for the Internet streaming and news laws.

Generative AI raises a host of interesting legal issues, but perhaps none will be more contentious than the intersection between copyright and services such as ChatGPT. The copyright questions apply both the creation of large language models used to train these systems as well as the copyright associated with outputs. These questions have sparked high profile class action lawsuits and government consultations on potential reform. Andres Guadamuz is a Reader in Intellectual Property Law at the University of Sussex and the Editor in Chief of the Journal of World Intellectual Property. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to explain the copyright implications of generative AI and to unpack the claims found in the copyright class action lawsuits.

After months of delays, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry and Technology has finally begun to conduct hearings on Bill C-27, which wraps Canadian privacy reform and AI regulation into a single legislative package. Last week, I appeared before the committee, making the case that the process is need of fixing and the bill in need of reform. The appearance sparked a wide range of questions from MPs from all parties. This week’s Law Bytes podcast takes you inside the committee hearing room for my opening statement and exchanges with MPs.

Several weeks ago, the CRTC released the first set of what is likely to become at least a dozen decisions involving the Online Streaming Act, formerly known as Bill C-11. One of those decisions involved establishing which services would be required to register with the CRTC as part of new registration requirements in the law. That sparked an immediate public debate over the scope of the registration requirements and their potential applicability to podcasts. This week’s Law Bytes podcast tries to set the record straight: the registration rules - and even the forthcoming regulations - will not regulate what you can say on a podcast nor do they establish a government podcast registry. However, the registration rules and the forthcoming regulations will have a direct or indirect impact on podcasts.

Since the Canadian copyright law reforms in 2012, education and libraries have increased spending on licensing and a non-partisan House of Commons study found no need to create new restriction on education and library copying rights. Yet given the misinformation flooding the copyright debate, the Canadian Federation of Library Associations recently spoke out in an effort to set the record straight. Victoria Owen, a leading expert on copyright and libraries, is the chair of the CFLA copyright committee. She joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the CFLA statement, the state of copyright law in Canada, and the significant content licensing by educational and library institutions.

Last week, the CRTC issued the first two of what are likely to be at least a dozen decisions involving the Online Streaming Act. Those decisions are already sparking controversy, but as the Commission focuses on Bill C-11 and perhaps soon Bill C-18, there is mounting concern that its other responsibilities are falling by the wayside that its independence from the government is starting to show cracks. Peter Menzies is a former Vice-Chair of the CRTC and frequently commentator on broadcast, telecom and Internet regulatory issues. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the current state of the Commission, which has never seemed more important but also seemed more out of touch and incapable of meeting its duties.

It’s been a dizzying stretch since the launch of Chat GPT, with artificial intelligence regulation and policy bursting forward as top concern in Canada and around the world. From a Canadian perspective, Bill C-27 got most of its initial attention for its privacy provisions, but its inclusion of an AI bill – AIDA – has emerged as a huge issue in its own right. Meanwhile, the government has also quietly been pushing ahead with new generative AI guidelines that may debut this week. Bianca Wylie is a writer and an open government and public technology advocate with a dual background in technology and public engagement. She’s become increasingly uncomfortable with the AI regulatory process in Canada and she joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide her thoughts about AIDA, generative AI regulation, and a process she believes is in dire need of fixing.

The Law Bytes podcast is back after a brief break, and with it, talk about the Online News Act or Bill C-18. All news – both Canadian and foreign – is blocked on Facebook and Instagram in response to Bill C-18 and the reports suggest that the move has had no real impact in use of the platform. Where it has had an impact, however, is on news outlets themselves, many of whom have experienced significant reductions in referral traffic, which invariably leads to less revenues.Much of the attention is on the big players, but the problem is particularly acute for smaller, independent news outlets. Chris Dinn is the founder and publisher of Torontoverse, a new Toronto news outlet that combines news with mapping technologies to create a different way of engaging with the news. The year-old site was growing quickly, but recently announced that it was slowing down in response to Bill C-18’s impact. Chris joins the podcast to talk about the business, the effect of the government legislation, and what he thinks should come next.

Coming off a week in which the government engineered a major cabinet overhaul that saw Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez replaced by Pascale St-Onge, an escalation of the battle over digital stales taxes, and which featured significant news on both the Bill C-11 and Bill C-18 fronts, this week’s Law Bytes podcast provides a mid-summer update on recent developments. Barring some urgent news, the podcast will be taking a break in August and return in September.

ChatGPT has taken the world by storm in recent months with the potential of generative AI – both positive and negative – top of mind in just about every sector. That is certainly true for the legal profession, where AI tools are becoming increasingly common and courts and regulators try to grapple with the implications. Amy Salyzyn is a colleague at the University of Ottawa who has written extensively in the area of legal ethics, lawyer regulation, the use of technology in the delivery of legal services and access to justice. In the coming academic year she’ll be teaching a course on AI and the legal profession and she joins me on the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the latest on AI technology for law and the legal, regulatory and ethical challenges it brings. This episode is part of a series of Law Bytes episodes that have been accredited by the Law Society of Ontario for continuing legal education Professionalism Hours. The program contains 30 minutes of Professionalism Content.

The Online News Act has continued to create a political firestorm this summer with a legislative battle that leaves the future of some Canadian news organizations stuck in the middle between sabre rattling from the government and Internet platforms. Chris Waddell is a professor at and former director of the School of Journalism and Communication at Carleton University in Ottawa and also holds the university’s Carty Chair in Business and Financial Journalism. He’s worked at the CBC and the Globe and Mail, where he won two National Newspaper Awards. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide much needed context on the current moment in Canadian media and to offer some thoughts on what may lie ahead.

Canada’s Access to Information system is now widely viewed as a failure, marked by extensive delays and processes that can be difficult to navigate. While the reforms continue to lag within government, the Globe and Mail has undertaken a remarkable project that does the work governments should be doing. Secret Canada is part giant ATIP database, part investigative series in the Globe in Mail on freedom to information. Led by Tom Cardoso and Robin Doolittle, the project is an exceptional resource that opens the door to better government transparency and greater accessibility of the ATIP system. Cardoso joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the challenges with Canada’s access to information system and the Secret Canada project.

Bill C-18 passed the House and Senate and received royal assent last week, leading Meta to confirm that it will be blocking news sharing on its Facebook and Instagram platforms given the economic costs and uncertainty with the law. Meanwhile Google is reportedly in discussions with the government about whether regulations might be crafted in a way to avoid a similar outcome. I’ve covered Bill C-18 extensively on the Law Bytes podcast, but the history behind the legislation and associated lobbying provides valuable context for the current situation. Marc Edge has written several books on the newspaper industry. His most recent work, The Postmedia Effect, helps makes sense of Bill C-18 as a continuum of lobbying for government support that has resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars. He joins me on the podcast to discuss.

With Parliament set to break this week for the summer, this week’s Law Bytes podcast provides a half-year report on what happened over the past six months. At the start of the year, I focused on five issues in 2023 preview: the role of Canadian Heritage, the increasing tensions over digital policy, the emergence of private members bills, wireless policy disputes, as well as privacy and AI regulation. The episode revisits these issues with an examination of how Bills C-11 and C-18 were pushed through the legislative process, the battles over wireless regulation in light of the Rogers-Shaw merger, and the failure to advance privacy and AI regulation.