LibertyVoice

The government today introduced Bill C-28, the Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act.  The bill carries a new name from the old Bill C-27 (which was titled the Electronic Commerce Protection Act), but the bill is roughly the same as the bill that passed the House of Commons last year.  That bill was subject to considerable change based on compromises from all parties.  The resulting bill was not as strong as first introduced, but it did garner the support of all four political parties and most observers.  The new bill contains some modest changes involving privacy, but most of the core provisions remain unchanged.  It deserves broad support and should be placed on the fast track given that it was effectively the subject of extensive hearings from the Industry Committee.  For more on the original bill, see here, here, here, and here.  A transcript of my appearance before the Industry Committee can be found here.

The Globe ran a story over the weekend that estimated the cost of proroguing on Bill C-27, the anti-spam bill.  It points to the hours spent debating the bill and the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent working toward its introduction.

Reports this morning indicate that the government plans to prorogue Parliament, effectively shutting it down until March. One of the effects of prorogation is that all bills that have not received royal assent die and must be restarted from the beginning when a new Parliament begins.  While the government can try to move bills with broad support quickly back through the process (reinstatement requires approval in the House), the delays are significant.  Only 27 of the 64 Government bills introduced during the current session have received royal assent, leaving 37 bills in need of a restart.  Of those, at least four involve technology law: C-27 (anti-spam, electronic commerce), C-46 (lawful access), C-47 (lawful access), and C-58 (ISP child pornography reporting).  The anti-spam bill was the most advanced, having cleared the House of Commons and slated for review by a Senate Committee early in the new year.

The Electronic Commerce Protection Act received first reading in the Senate on Monday with plans for second reading tomorrow.  It will then go to the Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications for review.

The Electronic Commerce Protection Act, Canada's anti-spam bill (Bill C-27) passed through the House of Commons yesterday as a motion to support sending the bill to the Senate received approval.  The bill received all-party support but will undoubtedly face an intense lobbying campaign at the Senate.  Copyright lobbyists, real estate agents, and marketing survey companies were among the most aggressive lobby groups seeking changes when the bill was considered by the Industry Committee.  Clement stood his ground and the resulting bill is a good one.  Indeed, the lobbying efforts and attempts to weaken the bill did not go unnoticed.  During yesterday's discussion in the House, NDP MP Brian Masse, the party's representative on the Industry Committee, noted "when it gets to the Senate we will see whether or not there is going to be another lobby effort either to kill the bill or to weaken it some more."

Meanwhile, Liberal MPs who failed to garner support for their reforms were still pressing for changes.  MP Siobhan Coady stated "while the Liberal Party believes the bill remains unnecessarily restrictive to legitimate business in its approach in many regards, we will support the bill at third reading as action must be taken against spam. We will monitor the legislation closely going forward to ensure that it does not stifle legitimate electronic commerce in Canada."  Getting C-27 through the House is a big step, but the lobby attempts to water down the bill will no doubt be back for another round as the bill hits the Senate.

The Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology has issued its report on Bill C-27.  The report includes all the changes to the anti-spam bill, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act.

Bill C-27, the anti-spam bill, passed through the Industry Committee late Monday with the bill largely intact.  Indeed, Industry Minister Tony Clement was true to his word as the several provisions that would have watered down the legislation were dropped (third party referrals, exceptions for survey companies and self-regulated industries) as was a provision promoted by the copyright lobby that would have permitted unauthorized access to personal computers in certain circumstances.

The Liberals on the committee did attempt to introduce several watering down provisions, but each failed.  First, the third party referral provision – dropped by the Conservatives – was brought back by the Liberals as Marc Garneau warned that it was important for realtors.  The amendment was ruled out of order.  Second, a provision to tighten the provision on false subject headers, so that it would only apply in more limited circumstances.  The proposed amendment was defeated.  Third, the Liberals introduced a provision to limit the scope of spyware to specifically enumerated concerns. It too was defeated.

Bill C-27, the anti-spam bill, is nearly through the Industry Committee with a limited number of changes.  The Liberals have already stated that they would not be bringing forward the amendments promoted by the copyright lobby that would have permitted unauthorized access to personal computers in some situations.  The same issue arose during Question Period in the House of Commons on Thursday.  When asked about it by NDP MP Brian Masse, Industry Minister Tony Clement confirmed that the Conservatives would not bring forward a similar motion.

At Wednesday's hearing, there were a couple of changes instigated by Bloc. First, a specific exception for political parties was inserted into the bill.  This is arguably unnecessary since the bill only covers commercial activity.  Second, the Bloc succeeded in extending the period of a business relationship from 18 months to two years.  The clause-by-clause review should conclude on Monday.

With the Industry Committee now scheduled to contact its final clause-by-clause review of Bill C-27 on Wednesday, sources in the Liberal Party advise that its MPs plan to withdraw several controversial copyright lobby-inspired amendments to the computer program and spyware provisions. Since first reported on Friday, thousands of emails and letters protesting the proposals have been sent to Industry committee MPs from all parties.  Sources indicate that the Liberals will withdraw three motions actively promoted by the copyright lobby:

• a new definition of computer program that would have excluded surreptitiously installed DRM from the ambit of the bill
• an exception to a ban on the "collection of personal information through any means of telecommunication, if the collection is made by accessing a computer system or causing a computer system to be accessed without authorization" in cases related to investigations of breach of agreements or laws
• an exception for telecom providers to the requirement to obtain express consent before users install programs on their computers

While anything can be happen over the next 24 hours, the decision to withdraw the motions – in combination with the Conservatives reversal on several exceptions that watered down the bill – should mean that the Electronic Commerce Protection Act is preserved as a consumer protection bill as it gets through committee.  However, the lobbying to water down the bill will no doubt continue as the bill moves to the floor of the House of Commons and then on to the Senate.

With the Industry Committee now scheduled to contact its final clause-by-clause review of Bill C-27 on Wednesday, sources in the Liberal Party advise that its MPs plan to withdraw several controversial copyright lobby-inspired amendments to the computer program and spyware provisions. Since first reported on Friday, thousands of emails and letters protesting the proposals have been sent to Industry committee MPs from all parties.  Sources indicate that the Liberals will withdraw three motions actively promoted by the copyright lobby:

• a new definition of computer program that would have excluded surreptitiously installed DRM from the ambit of the bill
• an exception to a ban on the "collection of personal information through any means of telecommunication, if the collection is made by accessing a computer system or causing a computer system to be accessed without authorization" in cases related to investigations of breach of agreements or laws
• an exception for telecom providers to the requirement to obtain express consent before users install programs on their computers

While anything can be happen over the next 24 hours, the decision to withdraw the motions – in combination with the Conservatives reversal on several exceptions that watered down the bill – should mean that the Electronic Commerce Protection Act is preserved as a consumer protection bill as it gets through committee.  However, the lobbying to water down the bill will no doubt continue as the bill moves to the floor of the House of Commons and then on to the Senate.