Comments on: A new threat to privacy rights in Canada on the internet?

By: Liam Young

Liam Young — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:47:22 +0000

Dare I say, it’s not the warrant (or prospect of no warrants) I’m concerned about.

It’s the complete extinction of competition with ISPs that we’ll have as a result of the excessively redundant but costly infrastructure that all independent ISPs will have to pay to support the requirements laid out in these proposed laws.

This law was written with the help of Rogers, which has its eyes on eliminating any and all competition for access to the Internet. With small ISPs no longer able to afford the cost of monitoring, they’ll either fold or be bought out by our unloved media conglomerates.

Once again, Conservatives have shown that they’ll gladly kill innovation, ecommerce, Canada’s Internet and the growing competition to their pet media friends, Bell and Roger, all in the name of stopping unstoppable crimes like kiddie porn, gambling and piracy.

This has to stop. Surprisingly, Internet freedoms could become an election issue!

By: Josh Barnett

Josh Barnett — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 02:44:51 +0000

This is really scary.

By: Advisor

Advisor — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:15:02 +0000

WRITE to your MP. Send them an email with your comments. They exist to represent all of us. I just did mine, and yes this will turn us into a police state pretty much like what is happening in Iran like now, where a few are trying to control the freedom of speech of quite a lot of people. You can find your MP going to this web site:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/HouseOfCommons/MemberByPostalCode.aspx.

Write to your MP and demand that they represent you in something that will turn your “innocent until proven guilty” into something completely different.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:27:13 +0000

Kwittet: I heard that lame spin, but it’s simply not true. Police will be able to get identifying information WITHOUT ANY WARRANT.

Determined “criminals” will simply move to encryption and offshore. This is simply more law-and-order pandering and a solution in need of a problem.

By: kwittet

kwittet — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:08:47 +0000

I listened to a radio show today and Peter Vanloan was on it explaining this bill. He said police WILL HAVE TO HAVE A WARRANT FIRST before they can obtain private information which means they will have to prove to a judge that there is enough evidence to warrent an investigation.and there is also a clause in there that the bill will be looked at in 5 years to see if it is doing the job they hope it is.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:59:30 +0000

I’m totally against this bill because it is unneeded. If the police think they have reasonable and probable grounds, they can get a warrant from a judge to intercept any communications.

I recommend from now on that everyone communicate via encrypted channels – use PGP and encrypted email, MSN with SimpLite, or some other means.

Screw these fascist Conservatives, disobey this blatant grab at our freedoms…

By: Big Winnie

Big Winnie — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:42:07 +0000

I’m totally against this bill. Without oversight, as you’ve noted, abuse is going to occur and people’s lives will be adversely affected. For example, Scott, if you posted a blog that contained something that the government didn’t like, what’s to prevent them from ordering the “police” to invade your privacy?

Does that make sense?