Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Privacy News

Canadian Government Scrapping Internet Predators Act 50

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the except-for-the-warrantless-wiretapping dept.
dakohli writes "The Conservative Goverment of Canada is scrapping the controversial bill C-30 They will instead make 'modest' changes to the existing Warrantless Wiretap bill. This bill was widely panned by Privacy Critics and members of the opposition. Another victory for online privacy!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Government Scrapping Internet Predators Act

Comments Filter:
  • Modest changes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EmperorOfCanada (1332175) on Monday February 11, 2013 @07:57PM (#42866827) Homepage
    I suspect that by modest changes they mean that they are going to gut our rights. Anyone who works in government quickly learns that control of information is power. It makes them angry that they can't get more information and it makes them scared that we can get so much.

    Exhibit #1: Egypt. They want to turn off Youtube for a month because of "blasphemy" what they really don't want people seeing is the growing discontent that is visibly displayed every day along with the misdeeds of the police; this will work of course because youtube is the only site on the whole Internet that hosts videos.

    We don't need a new internet law we need something at the constitutional level that protects us from government spying while also enshrining our rights to force the government to expose its secrets.
  • Re:Modest changes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Luckyo (1726890) on Monday February 11, 2013 @08:14PM (#42866915)

    Ah, another "government is this monolithic entity that is sooooooo scary" post. Massive upmods incoming.

    Reality is, most of these bills in the West are drafted by interested parties. Most of which are no governmental but private in nature. And while many laws look (and are) quite terrible as they are drafted by people with massive vested interests in them, modern Western democracies have numerous checks and balances to thwart such legislation from becoming actual law. Which is what happened in this case.

    The fact that you chose Egypt, a country that essentially survived beginning of a civil war and still hasn't worked itself through it and has never been a democracy befiore as an example of average Western government shows that you're quite pants on the head kind of special poster.

  • Re:Modest changes (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lightknight (213164) on Monday February 11, 2013 @08:25PM (#42866995) Homepage

    Yes, but that does not alter the fact that many of these bills, introduced to Western society, are totally at odds with its professed values.

    Allow me to show you: "We fought a world wide war to bring democracy / freedom / etc. to people who had it stolen from them / have never had the chance to experience it themselves, against totalitarian dictators / nazis / facists / etc. Skipping ahead to item two on today's agenda, the Chiquita / Dole / etc. corporation would like to overthrow a South American government, duly elected by its people, so that we can buy our bananas for less; btw, we'll be installing a dictatorship in place of whatever they have there right now, it's going to be total hell for those unfortunate people. All in favor, say 'Aye.' *pause* The motions carries!"

    Let's face it: that's f*cked up. And it's not like that kind of behavior has stopped recently -> it has only accelerated, like we're on a tight schedule to f*ck things up as much as possible before we leave this planet. Now, I am not an environmentalist, but I have to pause when I think about these kinds of actions -> they are not good according to anyone who has not had an ethicetomy. Plus I hate being lied to, as much as anyone else, especially when it's the all powerful 'lie by omission' being played.

  • Re:Modest changes (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wbr1 (2538558) on Monday February 11, 2013 @08:36PM (#42867085)

    Ah, another "government is this monolithic entity that is sooooooo scary" post. Massive upmods incoming.

    Reality is, most of these bills in the West are drafted by interested parties. Most of which are no governmental but private in nature. And while many laws look (and are) quite terrible as they are drafted by people with massive vested interests in them, modern Western democracies have numerous checks and balances to thwart such legislation from becoming actual law. Which is what happened in this case.

    The fact that you chose Egypt, a country that essentially survived beginning of a civil war and still hasn't worked itself through it and has never been a democracy befiore as an example of average Western government shows that you're quite pants on the head kind of special poster.

    However, those checks and balances are skewed. The interested parties (military industrial complex anyone? what the US spends most of its budget on), want these things to pass. They are their bread and butter. These laws do get passed (DMCA, Patriot Act, et al), and many that don't will rise again, and again with new names attached, until either enough money has changed hands to make it feasible, or wrapped into some save us from drug/terrorists/pedos monstrosity named some stupid shit (PLBAFOWO - Protect Little Boys Anuses from Osama Wannabes Online), then they will pass and one more right will be gone. One more piece of your privacy eroded.

    Meanwhile you will blithly watch your superbowl and say oh the checks and balances will get it. I can still afford my mortgage and comcast bill. Who gives a fuck?

    There are are two types of people in the the western world for the most part. Those who drink the koolaid that the gov works as is and ignore it, and those who by the gov line of saving you from yourselves and the evils around you. The fact is both are false, and those who see it are in theminority, and slowly becoming more and more shut out of anything.

  • Re:Modest changes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Monday February 11, 2013 @09:39PM (#42867491) Homepage Journal

    Did you read TFA? There was not one sentence in the proposed law that could be construed to protect children from predators. The only reference to predators was in the title of the bill.

    I can title a bill as "A bill to provide for Anonymous Coward in his old age"

    Then, I can fill the bill with demands to have total access to all the information on Anonymous Coward, including his IP address, posting record, referral data, every single bit of data that slashdot or any other site maintains. All of the verbiage in the bill is designed to identify you, then prosecute you for posts that I don't like. But, I TITLED it as something GOOD for AC, so you would be a douchebag to oppose the bill, right?

  • Omnibus bill (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CanadianMacFan (1900244) on Monday February 11, 2013 @09:47PM (#42867547)
    Probably everything will get thrown into the next budget omnibus bill which will pass and then we'll only find out six months later what was contained in it.

The more cordial the buyer's secretary, the greater the odds that the competition already has the order.

Working...