Canada’s largest media companies came together recently to file a copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI, the owners of ChatGPT. I wrote about the suit, suggesting that the primary motivation behind the suit was likely the hope to kickstart settlement discussions with the hope of a licence. Robert Diab, a law professor at Thompson Rivers University, raised similar thoughts in his own piece on the lawsuit. Robert joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the case and its implications for copyright and AI in Canada. The post The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 222: Robert Diab on Canadi ..read more

Justice Minister Arif Virani yesterday finally bowed to public pressure by agreeing to split Bill C-63, the Online Harms bill. The move brings to an end the ill-conceived attempt to wedge together Internet platform responsibility with Criminal Code provisions and the potential weaponization of the Canada Human Rights Act that had rightly sparked concerns from a wide range of groups. I wrote about the need to drop those provisions two days after the bill was introduced last February. By the time the fall had rolled around, it was hard to find anyone who supported the bill in its current form. T ..read more

Canada’s largest media companies, including the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Postmedia, CBC, and Canadian Press, came together last week to file a copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI, the owners of ChatGPT. The lawsuit is the first high profile Canadian claim lodged against the enormously popular AI service, though there have been similar suits filed elsewhere, notably including a New York Times lawsuit launched last year. While the lawsuit itself isn’t a huge surprise, the relatively weak, narrow scope of the claims discussed below are. Unlike comparable lawsuits, the Canadian medi ..read more

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage has for the past month been conducting a study on protecting freedom of expression. The counters of the study aren’t entirely clear. In fact, after I was invited to appear, I asked for some sense of what the committee was looking to address. There wasn’t much detail, which has really left it open for witnesses to cover whatever issues they like.  I chose to focus my time on two issues: the expression implications of Canadian digital policy and the chilling effect of antisemitism. The two issues have really dominated my attention in recent months ..read more

Last week, as Concordia students staged a “strike” to protest the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, video captured someone giving a Nazi salute to nearby Jewish students while repeatedly declaring the “final solution is coming your way.” Antisemitism has become far too common, but this incident, which had unmistakable Holocaust echoes, still had the capacity to shock. Soon after, the culprit was identified as Mia Abdulhadi, the co-owner of two Second Cup coffee cafe franchises improbably located in the Montreal Jewish General hospital. The Concordia events later gave way to violent riots in Mo ..read more

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 ..read more

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage is in the midst of conducting a study on protecting freedom of expression that has opened the door to discussing a wide range of issues. I appeared as a witness before the committee yesterday and divided my opening remarks into two issues. First, I discussed the way digital policies (notably including Bills C-11, C-18, C-63, and S-210) all intersect with expression in either directly or indirectly, arguing that we haven’t always taken the protection of expression sufficiently seriously in the digital policy debate. Second, I focused on the challenge ..read more

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 will break down the implications, including a discussion with Scott Benzie ..read more

Nearly one year ago, I made my way from my home in Ottawa across the river to the Gatineau hearing room used by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to participate in its inaugural proceeding on implementing the Online Streaming Act, better known as Bill C-11. I had regularly appeared as a witness at House of Commons and Senate committees, but this was my first time participating in a hearing before Canada’s broadcasting regulator. I came with a simple message: while the roster of witnesses was filled with cultural lobby groups and broadcasters asking for ..read more

The Canadian government has just announced the conclusion of its national security review of TikTok and arrived at a curious conclusion: it plans to ban the company from operating in Canada but the app will remain available here. I wrote earlier this year about the need for better laws to counter the risks associated with TikTok, rather than banning the app altogether. That post came in response to U.S. legislation that proposed to ban the app, but which is now in doubt given the results of yesterday’s U.S. Presidential election. There may well be good reasons to ban the app if it poses securi ..read more