Civil liberties group challenges 'draconian' Liberal election speech law


Danbones
Free Thinker
+4
#1  Top Rated Post
A Canadian civil liberties group has launched an urgent application against the Trudeau government in the name of free speech, the Sun has learned.

The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF), a non-partisan charity, states in documents prepared for the Ontario Superior Court that the government’s new election laws violates the Charter rights of Canadians who wish to voice their opinions in the current election campaign.

At question is a revised section of the Canada Elections Act, first put forward in 2017 by the Trudeau government, concerning the publication of “false statements.” The CCF argues that Section 91 of the Act, which can see violators face hefty fines and even jail time, has been made too broad and will chill free speech and democratic participation.

The previous version of the section of the law focused on banning those who knowingly make false statements about the personal conduct or character of a candidate for office. Now, the section has been expanded to include a wider array of statements made in good faith about a broader category of individuals.

“Those who make statements honestly and in good faith are exposed to the risk of imprisonment,” reads the CCF’s application. “It is a blunt and unrefined instrument that treats sarcastic quips and deliberate lies as one and the same – both are subject to a blanket ban.”

The new law now bans both false statements claiming “a candidate, a prospective candidate, the leader of a political party or a public figure associated with a political party” have committed an offence or been charged with committing an offence and also bans “a false statement about the citizenship, place of birth, education, professional qualifications or membership in a group or association of a candidate, a prospective candidate, the leader of a political party or a public figure associated with a political party.”
https://torontosun.com/news/national...on-speech-laws

So this means foreign commentators who will be OUTSIDE the law while Canadians will be completely forever libel, So, That would mean the GLOBALIST Nazis and Communists that hate Canada and conservatives and who want to DESTROY the Middle class here can now BOMBARD Canada with fake election news?
 
Mowich
Conservative
+3
#2
Karanicolas: Canada’s fake news laws face a Charter challenge. That’s a good thing

In a democratic society, political speech, and in particular speech around elections, cuts to the core of freedom of expression. Restrictions must be carefully considered in line with their targets and proportionality.

Recently, the Canadian Constitution Foundation announced that it was launching a Charter challenge against new rules which criminalize the distribution of “fake news” during an election campaign. While most Canadians would probably agree about the importance of promoting honesty and integrity in communications, the new law goes far beyond targeting organized disinformation campaigns.

Rather, the criminal provisions apply to any communication made with an intent to impact an election, a standard that would include just about all political commentary, from a documentary series to a single tweet. Criminal penalties now apply to factual misstatements about anything from a candidate’s “professional qualifications” to their “membership in a group or association.” In other words, Canadians had better be careful before they claim a particular politician is a “socialist” or a part of the “alt-right,” since getting a statement like that wrong could lead to up to five years in prison. To make matters worse, the law contains no requirement that the speaker must know that the statement they are making is false.

Journalists have particular cause for concern. Unlike Canada’s defamation laws, which allow for a defence based on having followed responsible professional practices, the new “fake news” rules contain nothing of the sort. There isn’t even an exception for parody or satire, so you’d better not joke about a candidate’s lack of qualifications.

While it seems unlikely that the law will actually be enforced against common mistakes, jokes or political hyperbole, this kind of flexibility is incredibly problematic in laws governing speech. since it gives the government a potential weapon to wield against its critics and opponents. Even without enforcement, over-broad content restrictions can exert a chilling effect against legitimate speech, particularly when a prison term is attached to the offence.

There is a reason why almost no other democracy criminalizes “fake news.” The drift in how the term has been employed by U.S. President Donald Trump, ultimately to refer to any messages which contradict his own narrative, is illustrative of the potential dangers, and shows why laws like this need to be crafted narrowly and with great care.

Against these potential problems, Canadians should question whether the legislation is likely to be effective in addressing the issue. Certainly, it is unlikely that the law could be used to apprehend, or even meaningfully deter, state-sponsored interferences of the type which played havoc with the 2016 U.S. election and with the Brexit referendum.

Hopefully, the coming Charter challenge will restore some semblance of constitutional order. At the very least, it should allow the courts to carve some reasonable exceptions into the law, such as reading-in defences for responsible journalism, satire and unintentional mistakes. Even better would be for the court to push the government to go back and try again, prompting a more earnest effort to create a response to the challenge of disinformation which does not undermine our core constitutional guarantees. There are a number of alternatives to criminal restrictions, including pushing for algorithmic transparency among platforms, public education and greater support for fact-checking and traditional journalism.

In a democratic society, political speech, and in particular speech around elections, cuts to the core of freedom of expression. This does not mean that elections should be a free-fire zone, where rules impacting speech do not apply, but merely that restrictions must be carefully considered in line with their targeting and proportionality. This delicate balance between deference to diverse views and safeguarding against manipulation is among the trickiest areas of law and regulation, and one which is made even more complicated by the advent of social media as a vector for foreign interference.

Nonetheless, it would seem to be self-defeating if, in our efforts to safeguard our democracy, we undermined the constitutional structure on which the entire system rests.

ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/karanicolas-canadas-fake-news-laws-face-a-charter-challenge-thats-a-good-thing
 
MHz
#3
The CCF argues that Section 91 of the Act, which can see violators face hefty fines and even jail time, has been made too broad and will chill free speech and democratic participation.


Trust the Media to challenge truth in words from somebody who is being paid to tell 'the Public' the truth, unlike the news Media who are tied to the apron strings of 'advertisers', aka, any company listed on the Stock Market.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#4
Funny seeing Trumpites suddenly caring about free speech.
 
pgs
Free Thinker
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Funny seeing Trumpites suddenly caring about free speech.

Hehehezi .
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#6
Hehehehehe....embarrassing, I know...
 
Vbeacher
+3
#7
We should be extremely wary of anyone who wants to regulate speech. The mentality and values of most of the political, academic and media classes are at odds with those of regular Canadians. They seem to have adopted the progressive intolerance to opinions which run counter to theirs, and which rules anyone who disagrees with them on social values as 'extremists' or 'hatemongers'.

Don't accept that men and women can change genders overnight? You're a transphobe! Don't believe Islam is compatible with western values? You're an Islamophobe! Have doubts about gay marriage? Homophobe! The only wonder is they haven't come up with a 'phobe' about those who question gender equality by fiat rather than merit. They're just 'sexists' or 'misogynists'.

Don't approve of abortion? Well, that's not a moral belief or a religious one. Clearly you hate women and want to take away their rights! And of course, if you disagree with the view that Sir John A MacDonald and Canada committed 'cultural genocide' then you're a filthy racist.

You can see by the above examples how the Left de-legitimizes contrary views as if they were violations of basic morality and sanity.And in some countries in Europe, like the UK and France, has succeeded in actually criminalizing such contrary views.Don't think for a second those on the Left here wouldn't like to do the same.
 
spilledthebeer
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

The CCF argues that Section 91 of the Act, which can see violators face hefty fines and even jail time, has been made too broad and will chill free speech and democratic participation.


Trust the Media to challenge truth in words from somebody who is being paid to tell 'the Public' the truth, unlike the news Media who are tied to the apron strings of 'advertisers', aka, any company listed on the Stock Market.




Poor MHz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The stuff he spews proves we need some sensible limits on HATE SPEECH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Here is yet another article explaining the truly messed up values that LIE-berals hold dear!!



With some comments of my own in brackets):

Liberal candidate loves Castro, just like Trudeau

By Brian Lilley

Published: September 9, 2019, Updated: September 10, 2019 8:16 AM EDT

Filed Under: Toronto SUN/ Opinion/ Columnists

Related

Editorials
EDITORIAL: Make defence policy an issue this election
Columnists
GUNTER: Perhaps the Murdered Missing Indigenous Women Inquiry came to its conclusions before it even started

The Conservatives are hoping to embarrass a Liberal candidate in Eastern Ontario over comments she made about the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

Although given what Justin Trudeau thinks of Castro and, of course, of basic dictatorships, it’s unlikely this candidate will walk the plank before the election is called later this week. In fact, if the Liberals win, she could be up for a cabinet post.

(Yes- sadly- given the Trudope family affection for hardcore Soviet dictators - it is a fair bet that Megill will be a LIE-beral Star!! After all Our idiot Boy Justin gets his values from papa Pierre- and it was Pierre that PUBLICLY extolled what he called “the genius of Red China Chairman Mao in rushing 30 million Chinese to the gallows”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(Yes- one would think LIE-berals would want to distance themselves from a “USEFUL IDIOT” - to use the Lenin Soviet description- who was extolling the virtue of Soviet MASS MURDER!! Cubans themselves referred to the first year of Castro dictatorship as “The Year of the FIRING SQUAD”!! Yet such is the LIE-berals hypocrisy they can talk of their love of freedom and democracy and fair play then turn and extol a vicious dictatorship!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

“Long live the Revolution,” Heather Megill wrote in a Facebook post in November, 2016.

That comment from Megill, nominated by the party just last week, was part of a longer post defending Trudeau who had come under fire for his tone deaf praise upon Castro’s death.

“Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and health care of his island nation,” Trudeau said in an official statement.

(Well GOSH- idiot brother Sacha Trudope told us that “Castro was the greatest South American leader of the 20th century - and much superior to any merely elected leader” - its just too bad about all the people who had to be tortured and killed along the way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

I mean sure, Castro oppressed the people of Cuba for more than 50 years, he jailed his opponents, banned religious practice for much of his time in office, closed down dissenting media and executed thousands — including gays and lesbians — but look at the schools and those speeches!

(Cubans themselves refer to the first year of Soviet Rule as “The year of the firing squad”!! First thing on ANY GOOD SOVIET “to do” list is ALWAYS to execute your opponents!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

There is no way to praise a man like Castro who rose to prominence with a promise to rid Cuba of a corrupt government and outside interference and then became everything he claimed to be replacing.

Unless, of course, you are Trudeau.

Trudeau gets a hug from late Cuban President Fidel Castro at the arrival in front of Notre Dame Church prior to the funeral of his father Pierre Trudeau on Oct. 3, 2000 Pierre Obendrauf / Montreal Gazette

(Isnt that nice- the Trudope family is so honoured by the bloody handed Soviet dictator that he take time off from mauling and torturing political opponents - and will fly in to comfort our own aspiring Soviet Asshat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(In other news -Cuban Soviet doctors perfected a way to make sure political opponents were made useful - even in death! Cuban doctors experimented and perfected a system by which they could drain virtually ALL the blood from a persons body AND SELL IT FOR A PROFIT - right before executing the prisoner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(And we need to understand that the neat Cuban trick was to get as much blood as possible for maximum resale value to hospitals in the west - BUT NOT take so much the prisoner passes out- because good Soviets KNOW it is IMPORTANT for the condemned prisoner to BE WIDE AWAKE WHEN FACING THE FIRING SQUAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

He had in fact visited Cuba a few weeks before Castro’s death, tweeting photos of himself receiving a gift of a photo album from the Castro family of a Trudeau family visit in 1976. In his official statement, Trudeau acknowledged that Castro was a controversial figure, but praised him nonetheless.

“I know my father was very proud to call him a friend and I had the opportunity to meet Fidel when my father passed away. It was also a real honour to meet his three sons and his brother President Raúl Castro during my recent visit to Cuba,” Trudeau said.

(These are the vile words of a true SOVIET ASSHAT!! And we will all die of extreme old age BEFORE any Trudope even considers apologizing for Pierre praising mass murder in Soviet China!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Gift from the Castro family – a photo album highlighting my father’s visit here in 1976… pic.twitter.com/4yY3MgW8K4
— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) November 17, 2016

Pierre Trudeau may have embraced a relationship with Cuba in an attempt to soften the brutal dictatorship but it didn’t work. That Justin was embracing Fidel Castro at Pierre’s funeral in 2000 was a shocking thing, Castro arriving in Montreal as an honorary pallbearer.

Perhaps you can be forgiven for embracing who shows up to comfort you in a time of loss but that Trudeau embraced Fidel Castro — and his legacy — even after his death is unforgivable.

(It is also a damning indictment of Trudope family political values!!!!!!!!!!!!)

There may have been problems in pre-revolutionary Cuba but Castro only made things worse while promising paradise. Cuba’s per capita income prior to Castro was higher than much of Europe’s. The country welcomed immigrants from around the world.

Within years of Castro taking power, the people were not only oppressed but also impoverished and have been fleeing by any means necessary ever since.

(It is ODD that so many Cdn useful idiots would see only the “good” that Castro did- while IGNORING the bloodshed and starvation!! Toronto (RED) star did an article several decades back- advising Cdn tourists not to bother tipping Cuban hotel staff as there was NOTHING they could buy in food rationed and starving Cuba!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(Instead- Left wing Star Soviet minded NUTS advised Cdns to take tins of FOOD with them on tourist visits and hand out the food instead - as the then current Cuban diet was DANGEROUSLY deficient in vitamins and nutrients!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

That Trudeau, and Ms. Megill, would praise such a man should be shocking to anyone that values democracy, who claims to uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In Cuba there are no rights and there are no freedoms for those on the wrong side of the government.

I could make a glib joke about Trudeau admiring China’s “basic dictatorship,” something he actually said back in 2013 but his affection for less than democratic governments is no joke.

His love of places like Cuba and China, both dictatorial regimes, is out of step with Canada’s democratic values.

I’d say Ms. Megill doesn’t deserve to be a Liberal candidate, never mind get the votes of the people of Stormont-Dundas-South Glengarry, but her leader and her party clearly do like Cuba as it is, not as it could be.

(Sadly Ms. Megill seems to be a prime LIE-beral style candidate- given the standard party values -we can only hope that the LIE-beral loving Soviet clowns are defeated as they deserve in the October election!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(Frankly it is disturbing the number of people with poisoned left wing views that are seeking elected office in these troubled times!! One has only to think of several NDP candidates who are happy to crow: “FCUK THE POLICE”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(And frankly- Greenies are not free of the Soviet taint either!! With Liz May struggling to rein in the more extreme sentiments of her party- which is displaying strong support for Muslim extremists!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Vbeacher View Post

We should be extremely wary of anyone who wants to regulate speech. The mentality and values of most of the political, academic and media classes are at odds with those of regular Canadians...

You mean like Trumpites that think football players should be fired for making political statements? I agree.
 
pgs
Free Thinker
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

You mean like Trumpites that think football players should be fired for making political statements? I agree.

Hehehehezizit
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#11
Hehehehehehe......

Trumpite upset
 
petros
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Hehehehehe....embarrassing, I know...

Nervous laughter

Nervous laughter is a physical reaction to stress, tension, confusion, or anxiety. Neuroscientist Vilayanur S. Ramachandran states "We have nervous laughter because we want to make ourselves think what horrible thing we encountered isn't really as horrible as it appears, something we want to believe." Those are the most embarrassing times, too, naturally.
 
petros
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Hehehehehehe......
Trumpite upset

Nervous laughter is laughter evoked from an audience's expression of alarm, embarrassment, discomfort or confusion, rather than amusement.
 
Vbeacher
+2
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

You mean like Trumpites that think football players should be fired for making political statements? I agree.


Personally I'd fire the ass of any football player who antagonized my fan base for his own political or ideological reasons. That uniform is not yours, it's mine. That field is not your stage, it's mine. This stadium isn't your theater it's mine. if you want to act outside the rules of the entertainment system called 'football' in ways which harms my brand, get out and don't let the door hit your ass on the way.


And I think Trump is a moronic, narcissistic scumbag.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#15
I think the NBA just did that when they kissed China's pay for view butt

Someone said something nice about the people protesting for freedom in hong kong and...

No More Kissing China's Ass - South Park - "SHOTS!!!" - s23e03
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vyo4urabLw
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Vbeacher View Post

And I think Trump is a moronic, narcissistic scumbag.

I bet there are plenty of threads about trump around here somewhere.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
-1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Vbeacher View Post

Personally I'd fire the ass of any football player who antagonized my fan base for his own political or ideological reasons. That uniform is not yours, it's mine. That field is not your stage, it's mine. This stadium isn't your theater it's mine ....

The NFL doesn't care about you racist Trumpites.
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+2
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

You mean like Trumpites that think football players should be fired for making political statements? I agree.

Man, that dude is living rent-free in that empty, cobwebbed space betwixt your ears. Christ you're as bad as MHz except instead of turning every thread into a JDS rant, you turn them into TDS rants.


Of course with your limited intellect, you missed one of the ironic, finer points of all of this. We have politicians who knowingly and willingly spew unadulterated bullshit during election campaigns but only the public will held accountable for making "false" statements.


Considering the so-called "climate crisis" is just one big lie, seems to me a LOT of politicians should be prosecuted under Groper's Law.
 
pgs
Free Thinker
+2
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Jinentonix View Post

Man, that dude is living rent-free in that empty, cobwebbed space betwixt your ears. Christ you're as bad as MHz except instead of turning every thread into a JDS rant, you turn them into TDS rants.


Of course with your limited intellect, you missed one of the ironic, finer points of all of this. We have politicians who knowingly and willingly spew unadulterated bullshit during election campaigns but only the public will held accountable for making "false" statements.


Considering the so-called "climate crisis" is just one big lie, seems to me a LOT of politicians should be prosecuted under Groper's Law.

They all know it is a big fat lie , to boot .
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+2
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

The NFL doesn't care about you racist Trumpites.

You know what's funny? Acting like an asshole because you support some dumb shmuck who goes on TV sporting a Che T-shirt while whining about oppression. Yeah, he was real oppressed. A 3rd string QB who got drafted into the NFL. A summary of his QB skills is this; if you're simply looking to field a team, then Kapernick is your guy. If you want to be competitive and have a shot at the Super Bowl, you're gonna want to go with someone else.


He was allowed to break NFL rules. Got paid to sit and picked up a sweet endorsement deal for taking a knee. Kind'a weird isn't it? The almost universal gesture indicating submission is taking a knee. Even in the NFL taking knee during a kick or punt return is a sign of submission; "I'll stop moving, just don't hit me".


And you might be wrong in your assessment of the NFL. While TV viewership has regained SOME of its losses, it's at-game attendance is way down and still dropping. It gets harder to pay your players when you can't even fill half fill a stadium.


There are also plenty of Black people who didn't support Kapernick's actions either, but they can't be racists, so they must be Uncle Toms, right?



It's cute the way the mentally deficient always cry racism. So, I take it then that your employer, or previous employer(s) would have had no problem with you protesting whatever in your workplace on HIS time and HIS dime? It's only morons like you who think "racism" is behind the people who have a problem with Kapernick's protest. Sure, there's probably some that are racist, but for the rest it's not the case that he was protesting or what he was protesting, it was the where and how.


It was the same for me when I used to go to concerts. I don't want to hear a bunch of political speech from the band or listen to them spew some ideology or watch them protest something, just shut up and play. That's wtf I'm paying $50 or more a ticket for.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#21
NFL > Jinentonix
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

The NFL doesn't care about you racist Trumpites.

Not as little as we care about you...

or what you don't think.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

NFL > Jinentonix

Cannuck....couldn't have brain damage.

He may have a sore butt maybe. But absolutely NO brain damage.
 
Dixie Cup
Conservative
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Vbeacher View Post

Personally I'd fire the ass of any football player who antagonized my fan base for his own political or ideological reasons. That uniform is not yours, it's mine. That field is not your stage, it's mine. This stadium isn't your theater it's mine. if you want to act outside the rules of the entertainment system called 'football' in ways which harms my brand, get out and don't let the door hit your ass on the way.


And I think Trump is a moronic, narcissistic scumbag.



Again, I agree with what you've said. But even as a moron and narcissistic scumbag, he hasn't jailed anyone or fined anyone for their POV. Just sayin....
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
-2
#25
He would if he could. Fortunately the system prevents it (you know, the system you Trumpites hate)
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#26
Bullsh!t ya lyin tard. You lie far more than he does.
 
taxslave
Free Thinker
+1
#27
Not too long ago a group of globull warming truthers tried to have a law passed to make climate change denial a crime. You know your position is weak when you require a law to make it the only possible position.
 
spilledthebeer
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

You mean like Trumpites that think football players should be fired for making political statements? I agree.


JUST A REMINDER here that it is LIE-berals and their civil service union HOG allies.................................


who are working HARDEST TO IMPOSE CENSORSHIP on us...............................


for THEIR GREEDY BENEFIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!



Here is an article illustrating the remarkable ABUSE of the democratic process that our civil service union HOGS are engaged in - at OUR expense - and it is a disturbing illustration of the creeping political COUP that LIE-berals and their HOG allies are orchestrating against us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

With some comments of my own in brackets):

CBC sues the Conservative party over copyright, 'moral rights' of journalists

By: Michael Higgins National Post

Published October 12, 2019

Justin Trudeau, Andrew Scheer are posing for a picture: Video excerpts from the English-language leaders' debate were among the materials the Conservatives used that the CBC found objectionable.© Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press

The CBC is suing the Conservative party, claiming its use of excerpts from the broadcaster violated the “moral rights” of news anchor Rosemary Barton and reporter John Paul Tasker.

(“Moral Rights”?? Sounds like SELF AWARDED HOG ENTITLEMENTS to me!! And whining about violation of “moral rights” SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT WAY TO throw mud on Scheer - WITHOUT having to actually PROVE anything!
We all have LEGAL Rights but “moral rights” are not legally recognized and thus any complaint will require ENDLESS legal wrangling and appeals to higher courts for definitions that will not be resolved till long after the election!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(CBC seems to have chosen this quick and DIRTY WAY of smearing Scheer as “IMMORAL” simply because it is a nasty sounding label that cannot be quickly disputed or resolved!! It looks to this cynic as if LIE-beral SMEAR tactics are evolving- one has only to think of the ATTACK on Patrick Brown in which vile allegations were made - in a form where NO RETALIATION could be made!!!!!!)

(Two women who CLAIMED that Brown sexually asaulted them made their accusations AT A TV STATION - to a reporter that one of the accusers was previously friendly with - and the media ran the story because it is the job of media to tell us important facts- except THERE ARE NO FACTS in what appears to be a POLITICALLY MOTIVATED smear job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(There are those who have said Brown should sue - but that takes years and will cost upwards of $100 grand - ALL out of Browns pocket - with the added bonus that his accusers own NOTHING so they will NEVER pay damages after losing - thus the attack on Brown SUCCEEDED by carefully taking advantage of multiple loopholes in our laws - most likely on gthe advice of a lawyer - just as CBC is apparently doing now trying to do to allegedly “immoral” Scheer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

The excerpts — which included video taken at this week’s English-language leaders debate — were used on a Conservative party website and on Twitter.

(CBC CLAIMS to be our public broadcaster dedicated to bringing us important news so we may make informed choices - and yet CENSORSHIP of views the CBC HOGS do not like is THEIR PERSONAL and selfish CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

In the copyright infringement lawsuit, the CBC is asking for an injunction restraining the Tories from using the material as well as a declaration that the party “violated the moral rights of the applicants, Rosemary Barton and John Paul Tasker, who are the authors and performers of the copyright-protected material.”

Barton, co-anchor of The National program, and Tasker, CBC’s Parliamentary bureau reporter, are named along with the CBC as applicants bringing the action.
The action is being brought despite the material having been taken down from websites and deleted from Twitter.

(Yes- its dirty pool - it WILL NOT MATTER in a couple of weeks whether CBC is right or wrong in the eyes of the law -they GOT what they wanted- they smeared Scheer and wrecked a Conservative web site and ads - for the remainder of the election campaign !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

In a statement, the Conservatives said: “The Conservative party has grave concern that this decision was made on the eve of an election that CBC is to be covering fairly and objectively. The Conservative party considers this a complete distraction in the final days of a tightly contested election, and we will dispute this lawsuit fully.

“The video in question was removed from our platforms well before CBC lawyers made the decision to file their lawsuit.

(There is a strong argument to be made that Conservatives SHOULD NOT be compelled to take down the video and that it is CBC THAT IS IN THE WRONG!!
I believe that CBC has taken this legal action simply as a quick and easy way to HARASS SCHEER and the Conservative party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

“The 17 seconds of CBC clips in the video included (Postmedia columnist) Andrew Coyne highlighting how Justin Trudeau broke the law, Justin Trudeau telling a Canadian war veteran that he is ‘asking for more than we can give right now,’ and one CBC reporter questioning why the Liberals provided Loblaws with $12 million in tax dollars to install new refrigerators.”

(IN other words CBC is objecting to its LIE-beral PALS being cast in a BAD LIGHT using their own words against them!! We can bet that if there was video of SCHEER being shown in that bad light - that CBC BIGOTS would let it be shown all over the internet!! Such is the BIGOTRY AND LIE-beral GREED of our times!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

It adds, “When you are funded entirely by taxpayer dollars, taxpayers should be able to use the footage.”

(And THERE IS A MORE COMPELLING ARGUMENT - set forward by Cdn Law Professor Michael Geist- who has also commented on DELIBERATE CBC censorship in the 2015 election!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

In a blog post, Michael Geist, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, said the Conservative party has a strong case for arguing “fair dealing” in use of the material.

The CBC’s “claim is based on an odd collection of unconvincing arguments, including the notion that clips from the debate might lead someone to think that the CBC is biased, contrary to its obligations under the Broadcasting Act,” he wrote.

(IN 2015, Geist commented that CBC was in violation of “fair use policy” - which means that political commentary IS NOT SUBJECT to the same copyright laws as other types of media!! Our democracy has evolved such rules to permit use of political comment for the purpose of EDUCATING the public regarding policies and ideas of our leaders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(After the 2015 election Professor Geist stated that CBC was using a deliberately distorted interpretation of “fair use” to CENSOR ANY VIEW that was hostile to LIE-berals!! I think that CBC HOGS have learned much from Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebels!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

“Moreover, the claim over short clips over debate footage is enormously troubling, considering both the importance of broad dissemination of the debate and the fact that the debate involves little specific contribution for any individual broadcaster. CBC has an unfortunate history of overzealous use of copyright to stifle freedom of expression and that approach appears to have reared its head yet again as the 2019 campaign hits the home stretch.”

(Yes- LAW PROFESSOR Geist offers us an elegant condemnation of deliberate CBC CENSORSHIP and bigotry against Conservatives!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

The lawsuit alleges the offending material was used on a website run by the Conservatives called “Not as Advertised” as well as on Facebook and YouTube.

The CBC excerpts included material taken from The National when Barton interviewed Coyne in December 2017; a town hall event featuring Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau in January 2018; an excerpt from the Power & Politics program in April 2019; and a clip featuring commentary from Rex Murphy on The National taken in September 2016.

“The CBC material captures the skill and judgment of CBC journalists and producers,” says the lawsuit filed on Thursday.

(Oh!! “Skill and judgement” is apparently now LIE-beral speak meaning bigotry and deceit!!! CBC HOGS have NEVER made any secret of which party THEY support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

The lawsuit says the use of the material in a partisan way “diminishes the reputation” of the CBC and leaves it open to allegations that it is biased.

(This is Hog ENTITLEMENT at its most GROTESQUE!! WE should ask why CBC presented the leaders debates in the first place - if for any other reason than to supply public information - EXACTLY according to the fair use policy that has governed such political discourse for centuries!! CBC DAMNS its own position by trying to HIDE FACTS AND STATEMENTS that it does not like - using BAD legal interpretations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

“Further, selectively editing various news items together to present a sensational and one-sided perspective against one particular political party may leave a viewer with the impression that the journalists are themselves biased, contrary to their obligations to be ‘fair and balanced’,” it reads.

(I say CBC INSULTS OUR INTELLIGENCE HERE!! CBC presented the ENTIRE DEBATE!! Later- Conservatives selected certain moments from the debate to HIGHLIGHT LIE-beral faults!! LIE-berals WILL DO THE SAME - IF they can ever catch Scheer saying DUMB stuff like Our idiot Boy Justin!!!!!!!!!!!)

(I say CBC HOGS are essentially claiming the MORAL RIGHT to PROTECT Our idiot Boy and his loser LIE-berals from the fallout of their own big mouths and stupid political choices!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(Equality is a fine thing - but TYING THE HANDS and restricting the public comments of certain groups SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE SMARTER than LIE-berals and LIE-beral supporters IS NOT DEMOCRATIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(The fact that CBC HOGS live or die according to which govt is in power and thus have a HUGE CONFLICT OF INTEREST HERE - is a FINE REASON to savagely CUT BACK the CBC budget so their bigotry and greed will not further erode our democracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
 
Dixie Cup
Conservative
#29
But they are biased! They don't simply "appear to be" biased, they are completely biased! Guess the truth hurts!
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#30
Trumpites don’t know what “truth” is