Law Bytes

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.

Bill C-2, the government’s proposed lawful access legislation, has been the subject of several prior episodes covering warrantless disclosure of information as part of the new information demand power in Part 14 of the bill as well as some of the surveillance technology capabilities found in Part 15. Those remain major issues, but there is another element of the bill that deserves greater attention, particularly at this moment when the Canada – US relationship is increasingly fraught. That issue involves mandated data sharing with implications for Canada’s international treaty obligations under the “Second Additional Protocol” to the Budapest Convention as well as the US Cloud Act. Kate Robertson, a lawyer and senior research associate at the Citizen Lab in the Munk School at the University of Toronto, wrote an extensive brief on these issues soon after the bill was introduced. She joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about a critical Bill C-2 issue that has thus far attracted limited attention.

The “right to be forgotten” – perhaps better characterized as a right to de-index - has been a hotly debated privacy issue for well over a decade now, pitting those that argue that the harms that may come from the amplification of outdated but accurate content outweighs the benefits of maintaining such content in search indexes. The issue gets its start in Europe, but the Canadian experience has featured privacy commissioner findings and investigations alongside court rulings and provincial reforms. Kris Klein is one of Canada’s leading legal experts on privacy, access to information and information security issues. He is the founder and managing partner of nNovation LLP, a leading boutique firm specializing in data protection, the Managing Director of IAPP Canada, and teaches the Privacy Law course at my faculty at the University of Ottawa. He joins me on the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the background behind the right to be forgotten, the recent OPC finding, and what may lie ahead on the issue.

The return of the Law Bytes podcast series this week coincides with the return of Parliament from its summer break. Digital policy may not be at the very top of the legislative agenda, but there are no shortage of issues that could attract attention. This includes lawful access legislation introduced last June, the prospect of online harms safeguards, and ongoing concerns regarding privacy and artificial intelligence regulation. This week’s episode looks ahead to the coming Parliamentary session, assessing the government’s likely digital policy plans.

The pressure to adopt new legal technologies, notably including AI, continues to increase as lawyers, law firms and their clients look for new efficiencies and tools to improve the practice of law. But these tools aren’t always easy to adopt – pilot programs, costs, fear of new technology, and security concerns are part of the package. Sukesh Kamra leads Tory’s Knowledge and Innovation team having spent two decades at the intersection between knowledge management, AI, and legal technology. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the opportunities and challenges of adopting new technologies for legal services. 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 45 minutes of Professionalism Content.

TikTok’s decision to pull support for multiple Canadian cultural organizations and events in light of the federal government’s decision to ban the company from operating in the country has sparked increasing concern. Putting the spotlight on TikTok makes sense, but it risks missing the bigger picture which involves a steady stream of funding cancellations in response to Canadian digital cultural policy. Netflix, Meta, Spotify and others have all had their own announcements with millions lost due largely to Canadian policy. Has Canada killed the proverbial goose that laid the golden egg on cultural support? Scott Benzie is the executive director of Digital First Canada and CEO of the Buffer Festival. He’s seen the impact first hand and he returns to the Law Bytes podcast to discuss what has been happening, identify why, and sort through the impact.

Canada’s outdated and discouragingly ineffective access to information system has languished for years to the frustration of many transparency advocates. One potential fix – or at least improvement – would be for government departments and agencies to make the full text of the records from access requests available to the public by default online. Yet the biggest barrier to that approach has been Canada’s language laws and a recent decision from Commissioner for Official Languages may have killed the possibility altogether for the moment. Dean Beeby, an investigative journalist and freedom of information specialist recently wrote about the case on his Substack. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss both the case and how technology may provide a solution, if the government is open to some legislative reforms.

Two days after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to suspend all trade negotiations with Canada unless it rescinded the digital services tax, Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne announced that the government was rescinding the tax. The rise and fall of the Canadian DST was marked by repeated warnings of potential U.S. retaliation, the Canadian government’s dismissal of the risks, and no shortage of confusion about the tax itself. There have been multiple Law Bytes podcast episodes on the DST over the years, but this episode takes stock of its rise and fall. The episode examines what the DST is, what just happened, and what it means for the future of digital policy in Canada.

The Bill C-2 lawful access focus has thus far primarily centred on the creation of a new warrantless information demand power and the expansion of production orders to access information. Those provisions are found in Part 14 of the bill, but there is also a Part 15 that requires closer scrutiny. It grants law enforcement access to electronic service provider networks, including inspection, oversight, and demands regarding the equipment on their networks. At issue is everything from the use of end-to-end encryption to notifications of network vulnerabilities. David Fraser is one of Canada’s leading privacy lawyers and he’s been sounding the alarm on the implications of those provisions. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the implications of Part 15 – aka the Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act – and what it means for network providers and the safety, security, and privacy of Canadians.

The government’s unexpected privacy reform agenda includes both lawful access in Bill C-2 and the evisceration of political party privacy in Bill C-4. While Bill C-4 is framed as implementing affordability measures, it also exempts political parties from the application of privacy protections on a retroactive basis dating back to 2000. To examine the importance of political party privacy and the implications of Bill C-4, I’ve teamed up this week with the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association for a joint podcast. Together with Executive Director Jason Woywada we recorded a conversation that touches on data and political parties, the BC litigation that seems to have sparked federal action, and the Bill C-4 provisions. The conversation can be found on both of our podcasts: this Law Bytes episode and BC FIPA Access and Privacy Online podcast.

Lawful access is back. Bill C-2, the government’s border bill, includes a fairly comprehensive set of lawful access rules, including a new information demand power that would result in warrantless disclosure of information about a subscriber, a new international production order, and requirements for providers to assist law enforcement in working with their networks. There will no doubt be multiple podcast episodes devoted to this bill in the coming months. To get started, Robert Diab, a law professor at Thompson Rivers University and the co-author of a recent text on Search and Seizure joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the historical context of lawful access and the key provisions in this bill.

The privacy concerns with Clearview AI sparked investigations and court cases around the world. The issues date back many years, but recently an Alberta court weighed in on the application of provincial privacy law in a decision that has big implications not only for that company but for the intersection between privacy and generative AI. To help unpack the ruling, I’m joined this week on the Law Bytes podcast by my colleague, Professor Teresa Scassa. The Canada Research Chair in Information Law at the University of Ottawa, Professor Scassa is one of Canada’s leading authorities on Canadian privacy and she joins the podcast to discuss the case and what it means for generative AI and privacy reform more broadly.

The CRTC recently wrapped up a two-week hearing on the Online Streaming Act that featured most of the usual suspects, though notably not the large streaming services. The Commission grappled with foundational issues such as modernizing the definition of Canadian content, instituting IP requirements, and introducing new discoverability rules into Canada’s broadcasting regulatory framework. Mark Musselman is a former entertainment lawyer, longtime Canadian movie producer, current PhD student focused on cultural and legal policy, and the author of the White Paper Black Coffee substack. Having appeared many times before the CRTC, he joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the recent Cancon hearing, breaking down the major issues of debate and identifying what was missing from the discussion.