https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2023/03/the-consequence-of-mandated-payments-for-links-facebook-confirms-it-will-drop-news-sharing-in-canada-under-bill-c-18/ Michael Geist [ ][Search] * About + Full CV + Photos + Contact * Writing + Books + Chapters + Scholarship + Columns + Columns Archive * Teaching + Regulation of Internet Commerce - January 2021 + Technology Law Internship + Global Technology Law and Policy * Speaking + Committees and Consultations + Keynote Speaking + Law Bytes Podcasts + Podcast Appearances + Video * Tech Law Topics + Bill C-10 + Copyright + Digital Tax + Digital Trade + Internet Governance + Jurisdiction + Lawful Access + Net Neutrality + Online Harms + Privacy + Surveillance + Telecom * Podcast * twitter * mastodon * mail * linkedin * feedburner * facebook * apple * spotify * google Office of the Prime Minister, Adam Scotti (PMO). https://pm.gc.ca/en/ photos/2016/11/19/ prime-minister-justin-trudeau-attends-apec-leaders-meeting-lima-peru The reproduction is not represented as an official version of the materials reproduced, nor as having been made, in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Office of the Prime Minister Office of the Prime Minister, Adam Scotti (PMO). https://pm.gc.ca/en/ photos/2016/11/19/ prime-minister-justin-trudeau-attends-apec-leaders-meeting-lima-peru The reproduction is not represented as an official version of the materials reproduced, nor as having been made, in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Office of the Prime Minister News The Consequence of Mandated Payments for Links: Facebook Confirms It Will Drop News Sharing in Canada Under Bill C-18 March 10, 2023 Google has been in the spotlight for the past few weeks with reports that it has been testing removal news links from search results. The move sparked outrage from MPs, who grilled executives earlier today at Canadian Heritage committee. But now it appears Google has company: the Globe and Mail reports that Facebook has confirmed that it will remove news sharing from its platforms if Bill C-18 passes in its current form. The decision, which would affect Meta platforms Facebook and Instagram, should not come as a surprise since it warned that it was considering the possibility last fall. In fact, the case for Facebook blocking news sharing is even stronger than Google given that news constitutes only three percent of news feeds on the platform and the experience in Australia was that its removal had little impact on user engagement. The concern facing both Google and Facebook is very clear. Bill C-18 establishes a system of mandated payments for links. While the government often characterizes its approach as requiring compensation for using news, the reality of the bill is that it requires payment for linking, indexing or any other activity that is seen as "facilitating access to news." Further, with the government indicating that it anticipates payments that could be as high as 35% of news expenditures for every news outlet in the country, the uncapped liability for these company for simply linking to news would run into the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. In fact, the question of links on Facebook was raised directly during the clause-by-clause review of Bill C-18: Mrs. Rachel Thomas: I'm going to try my hand at a tangible example here. As Canadians right now we have the incredible ability to exchange ideas within public platforms or online platforms such as Facebook. It's this new form of a public square where ideas are exchanged and sometimes quotes are taken and expressed and entire news articles are sometimes posted. I recognize that if Facebook continues to allow articles to be posted, they will be declared a DNI and they will need to enter into negotiations. Facebook has said that they may consider removing the ability of news to be shared on their platform so that they cannot be scoped into this legislation. If they were to make that decision and Canadians wanted to take a quote from a newspaper article and post that quote on their Facebook page as a small snippet, would Facebook be allowed to permit that without being captured by this legislation? Mr. Thomas Owen Ripley: Thank you for the question, MP Thomas. The concepts of "making available" or "facilitating access to" are really intended, again, to.... The primary driver behind this bill, if we could go back to first principles, is recognizing that Canadians use these services in order to access news content. Primarily, it's that idea of facilitating access to it. We've heard the debate around whether linking should be included or not, but the government's position is that you need to include it because, at its core, that is what it means to facilitate access to news content in the modern digital environment. Regarding the example you give, in a context where Facebook has made the business decision to essentially prevent the ability of users to link to news articles but an individual is quoting from a particular news article without a link, no, I do not believe that would engage or trigger the application of the act. Mrs. Rachel Thomas: But as soon as a link is included, then they would be scoped into this legislation. Mr. Thomas Owen Ripley: From my perspective, the act of linking is a critical one. It boils down to the facilitation of access. Again, at the crux of this bill is a recognition that the ways that a significant number of Canadians navigate to news content is via social media services or via a search service, which involves clicking on the link. Yes. This where the government is at with Bill C-18. A Canadian can post a quote from a news article on their Facebook page, but if they include a link to the source article, there would be a requirement for the platform to negotiate mandatory payment for linking. pic.twitter.com/8dt618rHaQ -- Michael Geist (@mgeist) November 29, 2022 The exchange removes any doubt that the bill would implicate Facebook posts merely for including a link that sends users to the original source. To paraphrase Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez, "links in, liability in." Given the inclusion of hundreds of broadcasters that are not even required to produce news, it should not come as a surprise that the two companies around which the entire legislation is framed would consider stopping news linking or sharing. Indeed, the government has acknowledged that there are two ways to comply with Bill C-18: either pay for links or stop linking. Given that choice, both companies appear to be moving toward exiting news in Canada. Rodriguez tried to downplay that possibility when he appeared before committee describing it as a business choice, but the reality is he chose the riskiest possible legislative approach. There were many alternatives, including an independent fund or legislation based on reproduction of news articles. Instead, Rodriguez and the government practically dared the companies to do anything other than pay up for linking, while taking aim that the foundation of the free flow of information online. It is that choice - the government's policy choice in Bill C-18 - that may ultimately lead to a digital news desert of Canadian sources on two of the most important Internet platforms. Share this: * Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) * Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) * Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) * Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) * Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) * Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) * Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) * More * * Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) * Click to print (Opens in new window) * * Related posts: [6577705305_0646d]Here Comes the Online News Act: Why the Government's Media Shakedown is Bad News For Press Independence and Competition [39415469772_b784]Why the Real Bill C-18 Threat is Bill C-18 [3376961077_a8551]Mandated Payment for Links To Cover 35% of News Expenditures?: Google Responds to Bill C-18 By Testing Blocking Links to News Content [4370655795_9d6bf]The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 141: Why the Online News Act is a Bad Solution to a Real Problem, Part Five - My Appearance Before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage Tags: c-18 / canadian heritage / facebook / instagram / meta / online news / rodriguez Share this post Tweet 14 Comments 1. [6bc6b60] Cory Crete says: March 11, 2023 at 2:44 am Bill C-18 is a really bad idea. The internet was not made to be capitalize on to begin with, it was literally made for the sharing of information to all for all. Bill C-11 is also a disaster because of how vague it is and how easy it would be for any government to manipulate in such a way once again the founders of internet never intended. All under the guise of protecting Canadian Heritage they are going to find this will do the exact opposite of that - Canadians getting less sources to review Canadian content and history. Gee, that won't impact our students negatively in anyways *rolls eyes. Reply 2. Pingback: Links 11/03/2023: Curl is 25 | Techrights 3. [a047fd0] Liz says: March 11, 2023 at 1:50 pm Isn't the real disaster the way FB/Meta sought to monetize access to news sites, costing news outlets millions in infrastructure to meet FB's requirements? Isn't FB's inability to program a decent system to prevent fake news and misinformation (something reputable news organizations and practices do) the real disaster?. Reply + [c50f4cb] Drew Wilson says: March 11, 2023 at 5:27 pm A) Canada has fair dealing built into it's copyright system. B) Facebook provided considerable financial benefits by permitting links on their platform to media companies. It didn't cost outlets a darn thing. C) Outlets themselves were posting their links to those platforms willingly, even paying platforms to promote their posts at times. D) The big media companies are about to shoot themselves in the face because of their suicidal push for this link tax. They will bear 100% of the blame when it all hits the fan. Reply o [b945a25] Jayme says: March 13, 2023 at 11:41 am Its going to be very ugly for the media when this hits the fan. Reply o [2c6793f] Kevin says: March 13, 2023 at 1:08 pm Let's not forget that a few years ago at least one newspaper (Ottawa Citizen) implemented its comments section on Facebook (if I recall properly). I wonder if FB charged them for that privilege? Reply # [b945a25] Jayme says: March 13, 2023 at 2:48 pm Many of there reporters would post right on Facebook and complain the big tech is hurting them. Reply 4. [1730e1c] Emma says: March 11, 2023 at 5:18 pm I have to wonder what they expected. This whole thing feels like the government losing the world's dumbest game of chicken Reply 5. [b945a25] Jayme says: March 13, 2023 at 11:39 am I think the media thought a deal would have been reached by now. Reply 6. [8ba76da] JohnnyT says: March 13, 2023 at 11:54 am Consider whether it's a good idea to get "news" from a "social media" feed with all the manipulation and filtering performed by the "social media" company. Possibly if the "social media" companies take their ball and go home, the "real" news sites (1) get more direct traffic and (2) actually have to work for it instead of relying on government-mandated handouts and (3) The "real" news sites are less beholden to the current government so they may be less inclined to kowtow to them. Isn't that win-win-win? Reply + [b945a25] Jayme says: March 13, 2023 at 12:00 pm If the media takes the ball and goes home i think you will sea a massive battle between the media and Feds. Reply o [8ba76da] JohnnyT says: March 13, 2023 at 12:16 pm If that happens I will make popcorn and watch the mayhem with great interest! Reply + [2c6793f] Kevin says: March 13, 2023 at 1:11 pm I would also ask, conversely, if it is a good idea to get news on this topic from a source (the media) which has a vested interest in a specific outcome. Reply o [8ba76da] JohnnyT says: March 13, 2023 at 1:28 pm No-one's hands are clean in this abattoir of truth. All we have left is the theater of absurdity, greed, and chaos. Better to sit back and enjoy the show than to wring our hands in worry. Reply Leave a Reply Cancel Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Comment [ ] Your Name [ ]* Your Email [ ]* Your Website [ ] [ ]Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. CAPTCHA Refresh [ ] CAPTCHA Code * [ ] Notify me of follow-up comments by email. [Submit] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] D[ ] Law Bytes Law Bytes Episode 159: Fenwick McKelvey on the Rapid Spread of Government TikTok Bans byMichael Geist Episode 159: Fenwick McKelvey on the Rapid Spread of Government TikTok Bans Search Episodes[ ]Clear Search Episode 159: Fenwick McKelvey on the Rapid Spread of Government TikTok Bans March 13, 2023 Michael Geist Episode 158: In Their Own Words - Ministers, MPs, Senators and Government Officials on Bill C-18 March 6, 2023 Michael Geist Episode 157: Stephen Spong on the "Goblin Mode Gaslighting" of Canadian Copyright and Fair Dealing February 27, 2023 Michael Geist Episode 156: Senator Paula Simons on Why the Government Should Accept the Senate's Bill C-11 Fix on User Content Regulation February 13, 2023 Michael Geist Episode 155: Mark Swartz on the Harm Caused by Canada's Copyright Term Extension February 6, 2023 Michael Geist Load More Search Results placeholder Previous Episode Show Episodes List Next Episode Show Podcast Information Law Bytes - Subscribe * apple * spotify * goodreads * stitcher * tunein * rss Recent Posts * VR1_7080 by Collision Conf https://flic.kr/p/2ntPmU4 (CC BY 2.0) The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 159: Fenwick McKelvey on the Rapid Spread of Government TikTok Bans * Office of the Prime Minister, Adam Scotti (PMO). https://pm.gc.ca /en/photos/2016/11/19/ prime-minister-justin-trudeau-attends-apec-leaders-meeting-lima-peru The reproduction is not represented as an official version of the materials reproduced, nor as having been made, in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Office of the Prime Minister The Consequence of Mandated Payments for Links: Facebook Confirms It Will Drop News Sharing in Canada Under Bill C-18 * Too much noise by duncan cumming https://flic.kr/p/FozpZZ (CC BY-NC 2.0)Cutting Through the Noise of the Bill C-11 Debate: Regulating User Content Remains a Reality * Tax Day New York. April 17, 2012 by Michael Fleshman https:// flic.kr/p/bAS7SC (CC BY-SA 2.0)Hey Minister Rodriguez: Canadian Digital Creators Are Not Loopholes * Reject. by Lucas Moratelli https://flic.kr/p/bvfc3T https:// flic.kr/p/bvfc3TGovernment Rejection of Key Senate Bill C-11 Amendment Reveals Its True Intent: Retain Power to Regulate User Content Recent Talks * x * x Open Books Law, Privacy and Surveillance in Canada in the Post-Snowden Era (University of Ottawa Press, 2015) The Copyright Pentalogy: How the Supreme Court of Canada Shook the Foundations of Canadian Copyright Law (University of Ottawa Press, 2013) From "Radical Extremism" to "Balanced Copyright": Canadian Copyright and the Digital Agenda (Irwin Law, 2010) In the Public Interest: The Future of Canadian Copyright Law (Irwin Law, 2005) . Michael Geist on Substack Get Postings via Email Get new posts by email: [ ] Subscribe Broadcasting and Telecom Legislative Review Panel Report (BTLR) [Jump to... ] Archives March 2023 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 << Feb Michael Geist mgeist@uottawa.ca Creative Commons License This web site is licensed under a Creative Commons License, although certain works referenced herein may be separately licensed. counter statistics