If you follow me for Canadian digital policy, copyright, and AI regulation, the deeper analysis lives on my Substack - including every Law Bytes podcast episode embedded in full.
Free to subscribe: https://t.co/JCjGx1Pgay
Google on Bill C-22's lawful access provisions:
"This treats all users as potential criminals. Metadata is not merely ‘administrative’ data – in some cases metadata can contain core biographical data that is fundamental to a citizen’s private life."
https://t.co/EiNvPeHEGh
Michael Geist Weekly Digest #30: the Bill C-34 Charter statement, the House debate, the Heritage committee response, the federal government on antisemitism and anti-Zionism, digital sovereignty on the Law Bytes podcast, and the Crime Stoppers breach
https://t.co/VfWIqEST2y
Heritage committee witnesses said social media bans don’t work, can backfire, require invasive data collection, and that kids find workarounds. MPs asked the government to study other countries first. Instead, it jumped to a ban now, with a review later.
https://t.co/PzwXJStyhJ
Potentially one of the most harmful data breaches Canada has ever seen: 1.5 million Crime Stoppers tips over 25 years, many with personal information, exposed through a third-party vendor. I spoke with CBC’s The National about the privacy fallout.
https://t.co/Z0gx0t96bQ
Germany, France and at least six other EU countries are pushing against “associate membership” as the name for closer EU ties with Canada, six diplomats involved in the negotiations said. https://t.co/RrctMbwobM
The Heritage committee spent months studying kids and social media. It recommended banning targeted ads to minors but stopped short of a social media ban. The government did the reverse: it rejected the ad ban and legislated an under-16 ban in Bill C-34.
https://t.co/PzwXJSu67h
The Bill C-34 debate began yesterday with the government pressing opposition MPs to back creating the Digital Safety Commission, a regulator with no defined powers, no exemption criteria, and no list of regulated services. Regulator first, rules later.
https://t.co/v7sipoUmXi
The C-34 debate had plenty of time for whether MPs back the Digital Safety Commission and none for whether a ban on every Canadian under 16 and ID checks for millions are consistent with the Charter. The regulator got priority. Privacy rights did not.
https://t.co/v7sipoUmXi
The Bill C-34 debate began yesterday with the government pressing opposition MPs to back creating the Digital Safety Commission, a regulator with no defined powers, no exemption criteria, and no list of regulated services. Regulator first, rules later.
https://t.co/v7sipoUmXi
Govt released its Charter statement on Bill C-34’s under-16 social media ban. No evidence, no case law, no foreign comparisons. By pointing to less restrictive alternatives, it concedes safeguards can address the risks and makes the case against the bill.
https://t.co/lCKFzY1CJk
Major new UK government-commissioned report on antisemitism in schools and colleges. The government immediately commits to implementing all 27 recommendations. Compare with TMU, which seeks to delay and sideline the Benotto report on campus antisemitism.
https://t.co/wXeebZXzng
The Bill C-34 Charter statement defends the social media ban by relying on safeguards: age assurance standards, Privacy Commissioner review, exemptions. But none will exist before millions of Canadians must verify their age and put their privacy at risk.
https://t.co/oaRdcNWovj
Even anti-Zionist groups now acknowledge the Minister @gary_srp letter was not a walk-back. There is no ambiguity left. The government’s position, stated in last month’s report and confirmed by the Minister, is that antisemitism includes anti-Zionism.
https://t.co/uV1nSkk17U
Govt released its Charter statement on Bill C-34’s under-16 social media ban. No evidence, no case law, no foreign comparisons. By pointing to less restrictive alternatives, it concedes safeguards can address the risks and makes the case against the bill.
https://t.co/lCKFzY1CJk
The @nccm is circulating a letter from Minister Anandasangaree that @AmiraElghawaby touts as “clarifying” that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. It does no such thing. The letter does not retract the report and twice says the gov't position has not changed
https://t.co/uV1nSkk17U
From @WSJFreeEx via @WSJOpinion: “It was as if we Israelis live on another planet, as if international law does not exist for us. We were seeing the most important institutions failing Israeli women,” Cochav Elkayam-Levy tells @tunkuv.
https://t.co/N5HVpfCjbJ
Last month’s Public Safety report said antisemitism “includes anti-Zionism.” Misleading claims now suggest the government walked that back. But it hasn’t. The Minister’s reply retracts nothing, twice says the position is unchanged, and reiterates IHRA.
https://t.co/uV1nSkjtim
Claims that the government “clarified” that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism are untrue. The letter from Public Safety Minister @gary_srp does not retract or amend the antisemitism progress report and twice says the government's position has not changed.
https://t.co/uV1nSkk17U