Donít Let Bell Censor Our Internet


tay
#1
Bell Canada has come up with unprecedented proposals to introduce a mandatory website blocking system with no judicial oversight and radical new copyright rules in NAFTA.1,2

These proposals will put Canada on a slippery slope towards online censorship and resemble the activities seen in authoritative regimes, not healthy democracies. But if enough of us speak up, we can get the federal government to reject Bellís outrageous proposals and stop them dead in their tracks.

Tell Minister Chrystia Freeland to reject Bell's underhanded attempt to exploit NAFTA to impose Internet censorship. Canada's copyright rules should be shaped democratically by Canadians.


The case against Bellís draconian copyright proposals:

Bellís reckless proposal is a disproportionate and unnecessary attack on users' rights that will result in widespread chilling of expression online.

This is a blatant attempt by Bell to prop up its outdated media business at the expense of free expression and our democratic rights.

Bellís proposal goes far beyond what even U.S. copyright lobbyists are advocating for, which is typically the most extreme.3

Putting a third-party agency in charge of what people can and cannot see online inherently gives preferential treatment to some online content over other.

A mandatory website blocking system with no court oversight is especially alarming when you are looking criminal liability.

This is the kind of activities that we see in authoritative regimes, which seriously compromises and erodes our free expression and democratic rights.

Bell Calls for CRTC-Backed Website Blocking System and Complete Criminalization of Copyright in NAFTA - Michael Geist


See Petition

https://act.openmedia.org/BellNAFTA?src=162062
 
Murphy
+2
#2  Top Rated Post
As long as we pay more money for less Internets, I'll feel truly Canadian. The only thing that would be better is if they put up the price of a Timmy's coffee too.

And beer.
 
Danbones
#3
beer used to cost 7 bucks a case
 
Jinentonix
#4
Not surprised. Bell has always been a f*cking scumbag company.
 
Hoid
+1
#5
Couldn't you just switch to a different provider if you found Bell to be too "Draconian" for your tastes?
 
taxslave
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

beer used to cost 7 bucks a case

You also earned $7.oo/hr.

Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

Couldn't you just switch to a different provider if you found Bell to be too "Draconian" for your tastes?

Might depend on where you live. We are stuck with Shaw or pay even more for satalite.
 
Hoid
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

Couldn't you just switch to a different provider if you found Bell to be too "Draconian" for your tastes?

in answer to my own question: no. Bell is talking about an industry wide regulation.

So what they want is for government to run an agency that finds and d=identifies and blacklists all these "pirate" websites.

I would rather not be the one paying for this.

**** Bell.
 
Walter
#8
Buy Bell stock, it's done well for me for decades.
 
highsticky
#9
Bell’s Canada is thing we remember for this starts NAFTA.
 
White_Unifier
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by tay View Post

Bell Canada has come up with unprecedented proposals to introduce a mandatory website blocking system with no judicial oversight and radical new copyright rules in NAFTA.1,2

These proposals will put Canada on a slippery slope towards online censorship and resemble the activities seen in authoritative regimes, not healthy democracies. But if enough of us speak up, we can get the federal government to reject Bellís outrageous proposals and stop them dead in their tracks.

Tell Minister Chrystia Freeland to reject Bell's underhanded attempt to exploit NAFTA to impose Internet censorship. Canada's copyright rules should be shaped democratically by Canadians.


The case against Bellís draconian copyright proposals:

Bellís reckless proposal is a disproportionate and unnecessary attack on users' rights that will result in widespread chilling of expression online.

This is a blatant attempt by Bell to prop up its outdated media business at the expense of free expression and our democratic rights.

Bellís proposal goes far beyond what even U.S. copyright lobbyists are advocating for, which is typically the most extreme.3

Putting a third-party agency in charge of what people can and cannot see online inherently gives preferential treatment to some online content over other.

A mandatory website blocking system with no court oversight is especially alarming when you are looking criminal liability.

This is the kind of activities that we see in authoritative regimes, which seriously compromises and erodes our free expression and democratic rights.

Bell Calls for CRTC-Backed Website Blocking System and Complete Criminalization of Copyright in NAFTA - Michael Geist


See Petition

https://act.openmedia.org/BellNAFTA?src=162062

Censorship on the basis of nationality is foolish.

At one point, David Cameron proposed that internet services be opt-out by default and that anyone who wanted to access pornography could request to opt in. Another proposal was that internet services be forced-option. In other words, the provider would force the buyer to choose to either opt in or opt out of access to pornography.

Something like forced-option could be reasonable given that some families have children for example. But to sensor on the basis of the nationality of the content is ludicrous.
 

Similar Threads

6
US tells scientists to censor flu research
by dumpthemonarchy | Dec 23rd, 2011
12
Google - The Massive Censor is here -
by Goober | Jan 19th, 2010
2
NHL partners with Bell Mobility and Bell Canada
by Technology Bot | Dec 9th, 2006