Latest news with #MichaelGeist
Globe and Mail
4 days ago
- Politics
- Globe and Mail
Alarming privacy threats are buried in the Liberal border bill
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa's faculty of law. A border security bill tabled by the Liberal government this week will have wide reach far beyond the 49th parallel. Buried in the massive bill are provisions to allow law enforcement to access information about internet subscribers without a warrant. While there may be a case for new police powers in the digital era, these should be presented in their own bill and be debated on their own merits. The pressure from Canadian law enforcement for access to internet subscriber data dates back to 1999, when government officials began crafting proposals that included legal powers to access surveillance and subscriber information. What followed were a series of lawful access bills that sparked opposition, both from the public and in the courts. For example, in 2012, then-public safety minister Vic Toews infamously said to Francis Scarpaleggia, now the Speaker of the House but then a critic of an internet surveillance bill, that he could 'stand with us or with the child pornographers.' The comment did not help his case, and the overwhelming negative publicity pressured the government to quickly backtrack by placing the lawful access bill on hold. Border security bill would give law enforcement access to internet subscriber information without a warrant Liberal government's Throne Speech passes as Carney survives first major test of confidence The lawful access campaign was effectively derailed for a decade by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2014, when it ruled that there was a reasonable expectation of privacy in internet subscriber information. It doubled down on that ruling last year, expanding the privacy safeguards by adding that IP addresses were similarly protected. The Strong Borders Act seeks to circumvent these decisions by creating a new 'information demand' power for law enforcement that does not require court oversight. The new power targets information about a subscriber, such as whether they use a particular internet service and if the provider has data about their usage. The provider may also be required to disclose where and when the service was used, as well as information about any other services the subscriber used to communicate. This is akin to law enforcement approaching a bank to demand if a particular person is a client and whether there is information about their account transactions, and which branches were used, but stopping short of asking for the actual account information. There are obvious privacy implications here that are certain to result in a legal challenge, should the bill pass in its current form. In most cases, obtaining further subscriber information will still require a warrant. The government is turning these into global production orders as it seeks to loop in foreign providers as well. This means that potential warrant targets extend well beyond Canadian internet and telecom providers to also include international platforms. Ottawa to overhaul financial-crime laws in new border security bill The standards for obtaining these production orders should give pause. This bill makes it easier to pass the threshold when compared with previous proposals, since law enforcement only needs to suspect that an offence has been or will be committed. Moreover, these orders can be applied to any Act of Parliament, granting law enforcement exceptional powers to pursue internet subscriber information for everything from Criminal Code violations to camping in national parks without the necessary permit. The bill introduces a new term – 'electronic service provider' – that is presumably designed to extend beyond telecom and internet providers by scoping in internet platforms such as Google and Meta. Those international services are now key players in electronic communications (think Gmail or WhatsApp), though some may be beyond this form of regulation, such as Signal. All electronic service providers are subject to obligations to 'provide all reasonable assistance, in any prescribed time and manner, to permit the assessment or testing of any device, equipment or other thing that may enable an authorized person to access information.' Moreover, all are required to keep such requests secret. Electronic service providers that the government views as 'core providers' are subject to additional regulations that effectively grant law enforcement direct access to their systems for the purposes of communications retrieval and interception. This is a revival of old proposals in which law enforcement sought access to the systems of Canada's major telecom and internet providers. These provisions will sound technical to most Canadians, and are seemingly designed to escape notice at the end of a 140-page bill purportedly about a safer border. But Bill C-2 is far from just a border bill. The government and law enforcement are running back a decades-old warrantless access playbook that should be roundly rejected as it trades a border crisis for a privacy one.
CTV News
24-05-2025
- Business
- CTV News
'Solution in search of a problem,' expert critical of Quebec streaming bill
Internet law expert Michael Geist says Quebec's law putting quotas for French content on streaming platforms is unnecessary.
Calgary Herald
30-04-2025
- Business
- Calgary Herald
Should Canada target Big Tech in trade war negotiations with the U.S.?
Article content Canada passed its own Digital Services Tax (DST) last year, rather than wait for an international agreement to establish common taxation standards that had been in the works. The DST aims to force big tech companies to pay their fair share of taxes and imposes a three per cent levy on digital services revenue over $20 million retroactive to 2022. Canada's move prompted an outcry from the U.S., which threatened retaliatory tariffs on 'discriminatory' taxes on American companies. Article content Canada's DST seemed destined for the chopping block earlier this year as Ottawa sought to stave off Trump's tariff threats, with Trump singling out Canada and France for implementing digital services taxes in a February executive order. Article content Article content 'These non-reciprocal taxes cost America's firms over US$2 billion per year. America has no such thing, and only America should be allowed to tax American firms,' the order proclaimed. Article content But the calculus may have now changed. Article content With the trade war in full swing, Ottawa is unlikely to back down on its DST plans for the first payments supposed to take effect this summer, said Michael Geist, the University of Ottawa's Canada research chair in internet and e-commerce law. Article content 'Policies designed to ensure that tech companies pay their fair share have been raised for years — and will now no doubt continue to be raised,' he said. Article content Not only could increasing taxation of big tech be added to Canada's trade negotiation arsenal, but concerns about the lack of U.S. reliability raises bigger questions about big tech's role here, Karanicolas said. Article content Article content Article content 'The time for naiveté is over. (The U.S.) could pull the rug out from under us if they chose to,' he said, pointing to Canada's reliance on U.S.-owned digital infrastructure, from cloud computing to enterprise software, as well as the dominance of U.S.-owned digital media platforms which could influence Canadian public opinion. Article content That might have seemed far-fetched when dealing with a close ally, but America's new hostile stance means the possibility can't be discounted. Article content 'We've seen now the willingness of the U.S. government to abuse the powerful position that American tech platforms have,' he said, pointing to allegations that the Trump administration pressured Ukraine to sign over its critical minerals by threatening the country's access to internet satellite provider Starlink. Meanwhile, Meta has said that it is prepared to ask the Trump administration to safeguard the U.S. tech sector against tough-on-tech rules from jurisdictions such as the EU. Article content Preventative policies could come in the form of better rules that safeguard Canadian ownership over vital digital industries, such as national ownership requirements for social media companies, to supporting decentralized social media like Mastodon and BlueSky to dilute the power of big tech platforms, Karanicolas said. Article content Federal regulations prohibit American broadcasters or telecoms firms from buying out Canadian ones. Yet Canada has allowed American companies to 'completely dominate' information ecosystems relied on by Canadians. Article content 'We should be thinking about these as critical national interests that we need to maintain Canadian sovereignty over,' he said. Article content Canada should make it as easy as possible for Canadians to switch to technological alternatives, according to Keldon Bester, executive director of the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project (CAMP). And where there are no alternatives, robust competition and privacy rules, such as the EU's DMA, can help ensure that dominant tech firms play by Canadian rules and keep them accountable to public oversight, he said. Article content Article content But actions targeting U.S. tech firms run the risk of triggering retaliation from the White House and could further strain Canada-U.S. ties. Article content 'We have found out that it doesn't matter what you do, you will be subject to the whims of the (Trump) administration,' Bester said. Stricter rules from Ottawa doesn't mean that Canada is placing a bullseye on any country or set of companies, but sending a message that Canada is a sovereign nation. Article content 'You don't get a free pass just because you push us around,' he said. Article content Chios Carmody, a professor and director of the Canada-United States Law Institute at the University of Western Ontario said earlier this year that Ottawa must stand firm on the DST and not 'cave in to U.S. demands.' Article content Article content At the same time, he cautioned that big tech isn't 'necessarily a foe' and has a role to play in building a strong Canadian tech industry. Article content Whatever action Ottawa decides should prioritize Canada's economic and national security interests, Karanicolas said. Article content 'We can't cower in fear due to the threat of retaliation. Any steps that we take shouldn't just be targeted towards American platforms. But taking these steps … to try to impose better accountability and transparency … is something that's in Canada's interest.' Article content
