Law Bytes

In a year in which AI has truly dominated much of the news cycle, the story of Anthropic’s Mythos may be the biggest story of them all. A version of the popular Claude AI service is reportedly so powerful that the company can’t release it to the public yet. As governments race to meet with company officials, there are serious cybersecurity risks, prompting many leading software companies to join a new working group to get ahead of the issue before the AI model is publicly released. Jason Millar is a colleague at the University of Ottawa, where he holds the Canada Research Chair in the Ethical Engineering of Robotics and Artificial Intelligence. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about Anthropic’s Mythos, the AI governance challenges, the importance of distinguishing between AI security and AI safety, and what governments should be doing to address this latest AI challenge. Show Notes: ABC News, Cybersecurity Concerns About Anthropic’s ‘Claude Mythos’ Explained, April 9, 2026

“Chilling effects” is a term people hear all the time: in court rulings, in debates over content moderation, in dealing with online harms, or in news coverage of surveillance and legal reforms. The focus is typically on how legal rules may make speaking out more challenging, risky, or even dangerous. But what if our understanding of chilling effects actually understates the issue? Jon Penney is a law professor at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto and the author of a new book from Cambridge University Press titled Chilling Effects: Repression, Conformity, and Power in the Digital Age. The book forces us to rethink chilling effects with significant implications for a wide range of digital public policies. Jon joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the book and what his findings mean for future legal and regulatory reforms.

Lawful access is back. The decades-long battle has entered a new phase with the introduction of Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act. This bill follows last spring’s attempt to bury lawful access provisions in Bill C-2, a border measures bill. The latest bill covers the two main aspects of lawful access: law enforcement access to personal information held by communication service providers such as ISPs and wireless providers, and the development of surveillance and monitoring capabilities within Canadian networks. To discuss the latest iteration of lawful access, I’m joined on the Law Bytes podcast by David Fraser and Robert Diab for a roundtable discussion of the key elements of the proposed legislation. David is one of Canada’s leading privacy lawyers and a partner with McInness Cooper in Halifax, and Robert is a law professor at Thompson Rivers University in BC and the co-author of a book on search and seizure law.

What are the limits of using AI to help run a legal practice? There is much discussion about what an AI future might look like, but with the rapid development of AI tools, the future may be now. The hot AI service of the moment is Claude AI, which targets various verticals, including software development and legal services. Zack Shapiro is a New York lawyer and the founder of the Rains law firm. He is a Yale Law School grad who clerked in the U.S. federal courts and practiced at Davis Polk in New York. In a trio of recent articles, he draws on his own experience to argue that the general-purpose AI service is already sufficiently powerful to have a transformative effect on legal practice. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss how he did it and what it might mean for the future of legal services. This episode is part of a series of Law Bytes episodes accredited by the Law Society of Ontario for continuing legal education Professionalism Hours. The program contains 45 minutes of Professionalism Content.

Age verification, estimation or inference is seemingly all the rage right now. Vendors are promoting it as the solution to thorny challenges to limit access to certain sites and services and politicians are eager to legislate in that direction, including in Canada with Bill S-209. Hundreds of scientists and technology experts from around the world have taken note of the trend and come together to issue a public letter warning about the privacy, safety and discrimination risks associated with these technologies. Ian Goldberg, who holds the Canada Research Chair in Privacy Enhancing Technologies at the University of Waterloo, was one of the signatories. Ian has long been engaged at the intersection between technology and privacy and joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the age assurance technologies, how privacy enhancing technologies could address some of the concerns, and the risks with current legislative approaches.

Last spring, the government quietly inserted provisions that exempt political parties from the application of privacy protections in Bill C-4, an “affordability measures” bill. The government barely acknowledged the provision in its the study of the bill at the House of Commons and refused to even hear witnesses on the issue. The Senate didn’t play along however. It conducted hearings on the privacy rules and the Senators didn’t like what they heard, amending the bill by including a sunset clause on the privacy provisions that gives that the government three years to come up with something better. The bill heads back to the House of Commons, where the government can either accept the change and have the bill pass or reject the change and send it back again to the Senate. This Law Bytes podcast episode tells the story of what the Senate heard on Bill C-4. It is what the government did not want Canadians to hear and would prefer to ignore altogether. There were witnesses from advocacy groups, but the episode focuses on testimony from privacy commissioners (current and former) along with Elections Canada leadership.

Over the past ten days, Canada has witnessed one of the fastest-moving technology policy debates in recent memory. What began as reporting about a tragic act of violence – the shootings in Tumbler Ridge, BC - quickly evolved into questions about AI safety, corporate responsibility, police reporting obligations, and now potential AI regulation. This week’s Law Bytes podcast is a bit different from the norm. Building off my Globe and Mail op-ed, I walk through what has happened thus far, examine the potential policy responses, and explain why both the Online Harms Act and current AI legislative models are poorly suited to this problem, and argue that Canada instead needs to start thinking seriously instead about an AI Transparency Act.

The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 258: Jaxson Khan With an Insider Perspective on AI Policy Development in Canada Earlier this month, the government quietly released a “what we heard” report this discussing the response to its 30-day sprint AI consultation from last October. The consultation was promoted as giving Canadians – including a 28 person expert advisory board – the chance to provide their views on AI as the AI Minister Evan Solomon works toward a national AI strategy. The consultation garnered some criticism for its speed and missing perspectives on the expert panel. More recently on the use of AI to assess the results have sparked further doubts about it. Jaxson Khan is the CEO and Founder of Aperature AI and a Senior Fellow at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. But before that, he served as Senior Policy Advisor the Minister of Innovation Science and Industry, where AI was one of his lead responsibilities. Jaxson joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide an insider perspective on AI policy development along with his thoughts on the AI consultation and its results.

Social media bans for younger users have begun to take hold in various countries, particularly in Europe. In Canada, Bill S-209 may ostensibly be about underage access to pornography sites, but the bill’s proponents seem positively giddy at the prospect of a more broad application to social media. This trend started in Australia, which passed a social media ban for those under 16 in late 2024 with the law taking effect just a couple of months ago. Lisa Given is the Distinguished Professor of Information Sciences at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology or RMIT in Melbourne, Australia. She has been closely tracking and commenting on the Australian legislation and she joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss its origins, how the law functions, the concerns it has raised, and what lessons Canada might draw from the experience to date.

Concerns about the dominance of big tech companies has been steadily mounting for years, leading to an increased emphasis on the role that competition law might play. The government recently expanded the tool set within the Competition Act by expanding the private right of access that enables individuals to launch their own claims. That led quickly to a case against Google, which the Competition Tribunal addressed in a recent ruling. To help unpack the state of the law, the Tribunal’s decision and what it means for future actions, my colleague Professor Jennifer Quaid joins the Law Bytes podcast. Professor Quaid is an internationally recognized leading legal expert and scholar in the fields of organizational criminal liability, corporate accountability, competition and business regulation as well as a Senior Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI).

The Law Bytes podcast is back, starting with an episode on the limits of Canadian law in addressing the concerns associated with Grok AI, the AI chatbot that garnered global attention over the widespread creation and distribution of AI-generated sexualized deep fakes. Weaving together online harms, privacy, AI regulation, and platform regulation into a single issue, there have been service bans in some countries but Canada has thus far struggled to respond. To help understand what has taken place and Canada’s law and policy options, Professor Heidi Tworek returns to the Law Bytes podcast. Professor Tworek is the Canada Research Chair and Professor of History and Public Policy at the University of British Columbia, where she also directs the Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions. Her work explores how new communications technologies affect democracy in the past and present and she served on the government’s online harms advisory board.

Canadian digital law and policy in 2025 was marked by the unpredictable with changes in leadership in Canada and the U.S. driving a shift in policy approach. Over the past year, that included a reversal on the digital services tax, the re-introduction of lawful access legislation, and the end of several government digital policy bills including online harms, privacy, and AI regulation. For this final Law Bytes podcast of 2025, I go solo without a guest to talk about the most significant developments in Canadian digital policy from the past year.

The creation of an Artists' Resale Right has been adopted in many countries to at best mixed reviews. They’re unsurprisingly widely supported by potential beneficiaries, but the data on who actually benefits raises real questions about the wisdom of the policy. Canada may be headed in the same policy direction as the government recently announced in its budget plans to introduce the measure. Professor Guy Rub is the Vincent J. Marella Professor of Law at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law and an expert in the intersection between intellectual property law, commercial law, the arts, and economic theory. Professor Rub has written critically about the Artists' Resale Right including as part of a submission to a House of Commons committee that studied the issue several years ago. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the policy measure and its drawbacks, including his view that it primarily benefits artists who are wealthy, old, or dead.

The CRTC recently released its much anticipated decision on Canadian content rules, the first two decisions that could reshape broadcasting and film/TV production in Canada. The Commission promoted its Cancon approach as offering new flexibility into the system but the fine print matters as some changes may be more restrictive than they appear at first glance. To help make sense of the decision, Len St-Aubin, the former Director General of Telecommunications Policy at Industry Canada, joins the Law Bytes podcast. Len provided consulting services to Netflix until 2020 and has since been an active participant in the debate on Internet policy as part of the Canadian Internet Society.

Digital sovereignty is hot the digital policy phrase of the moment driving discussion on Canadian digital policy involving AI, digital infrastructure, privacy, and cultural policy among others. Yet despite its widespread use, its meaning remains opaque as it often used to frame – or reframe – longstanding policy positions. The government has begun to flesh out the issue with Treasury Board recently releasing a white paper on digital sovereignty that provides a useful starting point for discussion. Jennifer Pybus, the Canada Research Chair in Data, Democracy and AI at York University joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the white paper and Canada’s digital sovereignty debate.

I’m not quite sure how this happened, but somehow this is the 250th episode of the Law Bytes podcast. To mark this milestone, I’m joined by Jan Gerlach, Wikimedia’s Director of Public Policy, who leads its EU advocacy work, including efforts on UK Online Safety Act. This is particularly relevant in a Canadian context since this work has touched on issues such as user identification, platform regulation, and rules surrounding AI. Our conversation features a wide ranging discussion on these issues, providing insight into some of the risks and challenges associated with digital policy reform.

The government’s AI consultation concluded at the end of October with expectations that a strategy will emerge before the end of the year. I participated in the consultation with a brief submission and in an appearance as a witness before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage for its study on the effectiveness of technological advances in artificial intelligence on the creative sector. That study touched on many of the same issues as the AI consult with robust discussion on transparency, regulation, and navigating potentially conflicting policy objectives. This week’s Law Bytes podcast offer up a taste of both with the key issues raised in the submission and clips from the committee appearance including my opening statement and exchanges with multiple MPs.

AI Minister Evan Solomon’s AI public consultation – framed as a 30 day sprint – wrapped up last week with expectations that the government will unveil a new AI strategy by the end of the year. Much of the emphasis to date has focused on how Canada can ensure that it is an AI leader with Solomon previously warning about how the government may have “over-indexed” on AI regulation. Mark Surman, the President of Mozilla, has been a leading global voice on digital policy for many years. He has been increasingly vocal about the benefits of public AI as a counter to the big tech leadership. He joins the Law Bytes podcast for a wide ranging discussion on digital policy, the role of open source, and benefits of a public AI model.

Bill S-209, the legislative effort to establish age verification requirements for sites and services that are said to facilitate access to pornography, is back. The bill has some modest improvements from the earlier S-210, but the core concerns – overbroad scope that lumps in social media companies, Internet providers, and AI services with pornography sites, the privacy and equity implications of mandated age verification, and the use of nationwide website blocking – remain. Last week, I appeared before the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs where I identified many of the concerns with the bill and engaged in a detailed discussion with multiple senators. This week’s Law Bytes podcast goes inside the hearing room for my opening statement and the Q&A with Senators that followed.

Stablecoins have increasingly begun to enter the mainstream with previously reticent policy makers, regulators, and financial institutions now shifting toward regulatory frameworks that seem more supportive of their development. The U.S. has been the most aggressive with the recent passage of the GENIUS Act, but Canadian officials have taken notice and begun to speak openly about the issue. Mohamed Zohiri is a Legal Counsel and Fintech Advisor at the Alberta Securities Commission who has focused on stablecoins and their regulation for many years both during his graduate legal work and at the ASC. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to provide an introduction to stablecoins, examines the new U.S. legislation that may spark increased investment, and outlines where Canada currently stands on the issue.