Columns

Youtube by Esther Vargas (CC BY-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/g8Y9qs

How a Dancing Baby Struck a Blow for Balanced Copyright Law

In February 2007, Stephanie Lenz, a California mother of a pair of young toddlers, shot a short video of her children dancing in the family kitchen with the Prince song “Let’s Go Crazy” playing in the background. Lenz proceeded to upload the 29 second video to YouTube so that friends and family could see it.

Thousands of hours of user-generated video are posted online every day and there was nothing particularly remarkable about the dancing baby video. What set it apart, however, was that several months later Universal Music Group, Prince’s music label, sent a takedown notice to YouTube claiming that it infringed its copyright.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that similar takedown notices are sent to Internet intermediaries such as Google every hour. Yet this particular takedown demand seemed so at odds with the law (few experts believe it infringes copyright) that it sparked an eight year court battle in the United States and served as the inspiration for a 2012 Canadian copyright reform that protects users and websites that create and host non-commercial user-generated content.

September 22, 2015 — 2 comments — Columns

Wiertz Sebastien - Privacy by Sebastien Wiertz (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/ahk6nh

Why Internet Privacy Should be a Key Election Issue

Canada’s controversial anti-terrorism bill, Bill C-51, has emerged as a key talking point in the current election campaign. Pointing to its big implications for privacy and surveillance, the NDP sees political opportunity by emphasizing its opposition to the bill, while the Liberals have been forced to defend their decision to support it (but call for amendments if elected). The Conservatives unsurprisingly view the bill as evidence of their commitment to national security and have even floated the possibility of additional anti-terror measures.

While Bill C-51 now represents a legislative shorthand for the parties positions on privacy and surveillance, a potentially bigger privacy issue merits closer attention.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that last year, the government concluded more than a decade of debate over “lawful access” legislation by enacting a bill that provided new law enforcement powers for access to Internet and telecom data. The bill came just as reports revealed that telecom providers faced more than a million requests for such information each year and the Supreme Court of Canada issued its landmark Spencer decision, which ruled that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their basic subscriber information, including name, address, and IP address.

September 18, 2015 — 4 comments — Columns

New Google AdWords Keyword Tool by TopRank Online Marketing (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/81NvSK

BC Court Ruling Offers Strong Defence of Internet Keyword Advertising

The success of Internet giant Google has largely been based on something small: Internet advertising that use tiny keyword-based ads to generate billions of dollars in revenue. Given Google’s massive audience, advertisers have been willing to pay for search-based ads that deliver clicks back to their websites. Those ads appear as sponsored results alongside the organic, relevancy-based search results.

The Google model involves an auction process in which advertisers bid to place their ad against results based on the search terms entered by users. Under the model, whoever is willing to pay the most for a given term or search query has their ad appear as a “sponsored link.” Whenever a user clicks on the sponsored link, the marketer pays Google the bid amount. Each click may only cost a few pennies, but with millions of clicks every day, the keyword advertising business is a multi-billion dollar business.

My weekly technology law column (homepage version) notes that Google’s keyword advertising approach has been a huge commercial success, but it has long raised legal concerns over whether trade mark owners have rights in their marks that extend to their use as keyword advertisements. For example, would it be a trademark violation for Bell Canada to purchase keyword ads using terms such as Telus or Rogers so that its ad would appear alongside search results for the competition?

September 10, 2015 — 8 comments — Columns

Senado / Senate by Márcio Cabral de Moura (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/9LDyaV

Senate Reports Give a Glimpse of Potential Future Digital Policies

The trial of Senator Mike Duffy featured several notable revelations last week about the inner workings of the Prime Minister’s Office. One of the most important was found in a 2013 memo written by former chief of staff Nigel Wright that focuses on the control exerted by the PMO over the Senate. While the Senate is nominally an independent body of “sober second thought”, the memo highlights how the PMO expects Senate leadership to follow directions from the Prime Minister and to avoid developing policy positions without advance consultations and approval.

For anyone who has followed Senate committee reviews of legislative proposals, the Wright memo is not particularly surprising. This past spring, a Senate committee review of Bill C-51, the controversial anti-terrorism legislation, heard from experts such as the Privacy Commissioner of Canada about much-needed reforms. Yet once it was time to vote, the committee left the bill unchanged, lending an air of theatre to the entire process.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that assuming that policy control over Senate committee remains a priority, a recent batch of Senate reports provides new insights into future Conservative policies. Weeks before the election call, Senate committees began releasing long-awaited reports on a wide range of issues including national security, digital commerce, and the future of the CBC. In fact, more Senate committee reports were released in June and July (15 in total) than in the previous 18 months combined.

August 25, 2015 — 3 comments — Columns

07290271 by SumOfUs (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/wE5K8y

Premature Capitulation: How Canada Caved at the TPP Talks in Hawaii

Late last month, Canada joined eleven other countries including the United States, Japan, and Australia in Hawaii for what many experts expected would be the final round of negotiations on the Trans Pacific Partnership. According to media reports, the Canadian government was among those expecting the talks on the proposed trade deal that covers nearly 40 per cent of world GDP to conclude, with officials lining up the corporate community to immediately express their support for the agreement.

However, negotiators left Hawaii empty handed, as disputes over intellectual property laws, safeguards and tariffs for the dairy and sugar industries, as well as disagreement over the auto sector, could not be resolved. With Canada plunged into an election campaign hours later, the government sought to assure its TPP partners that it could continue to negotiate even while acting in a “caretaker” capacity.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that while those negotiations are expected to resume in the weeks ahead, sources advise that Canada dropped numerous demands on key patent and copyright issues in Hawaii, likely in the mistaken belief that a concluded deal was imminent. Indeed, after withholding agreement on critical issues such as anti-patent trolling rules, website blocking, restrictions on digital locks, trademark classification, and border enforcement, Canadian negotiators caved to U.S. pressure but failed to garner agreement.

August 17, 2015 — 6 comments — Columns