Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Privacy Your Rights Online

Canadian Govt To Introduce Massive Internet Surveillance Law 215

Posted by samzenpus
from the what-are-you-looking-at? dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Canadian government will introduce new Internet surveillance legislation tomorrow that will mandate a massive new surveillance infrastructure at all Canadian ISPs and remove the need for court oversight of the disclosure of customer information. Michael Geist has a detailed FAQ on the history of the bill, the likely contents, the lack of government evidence supporting the need for the invasive legislation, and what Canadians can do about it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Govt To Introduce Massive Internet Surveillance Law

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:43PM (#39020431)

    Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said the law will give the tools to police to adequately deal with 21st-century technology, and said anyone opposing the laws favours "the rights of child pornographers and organized crime ahead of the rights of lawabiding citizens."

    If that's true, why do you need to avoid court oversight? If you're going after real criminals, what exactly is stopping you from getting a *warrant* to track them and get their information? Are Canadian judges uniquely reluctant to sign warrants when actual criminal activity is involved, so much so that you need to bypass them?

    Or are you REALLY looking to go after someone else, someone that a judge is NOT going to sign a warrant for?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:48PM (#39020509)

    What they want:
    Step 1: assume all citizens are involved in organized crime
    Step 2: observe until you can find a case
    Step 3: issue fines
    Step 4: revel in revenue increases due to above fines

    It gets a lot harder when someone is asking "what probable cause do you have to watch this one?"

  • Is it time? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stanlyb (1839382) on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:50PM (#39020539)
    ...for a change? I have another proposition: Lets pass a bill for a full massive surveillance infrastructure at all politicians, and here comes the important part, WITHOUT court order. Who is with me?
  • by The Askylist (2488908) on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:50PM (#39020543)

    Won't somebody think of the children?

    Typical slimeball politician - he'll probably come out with "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" next.

    Don't forget - Canada doesn't have freedom of speech, so the police will be able to use this to harass thought criminals and other doubleplusungood types.

  • Re:Is it time? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ColdWetDog (752185) on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:52PM (#39020563) Homepage

    ...for a change? I have another proposition: Lets pass a bill for a full massive surveillance infrastructure at all politicians, and here comes the important part, WITHOUT court order. Who is with me?

    Why are you worried about getting a court order? I should think that being a politician would, in and of itself, be 'probable cause'.

  • Thin Veil (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DaMattster (977781) on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:53PM (#39020569)
    That is an extremely thin veil. The politicans really want to ultimately be able to control dissent. I grow weary of this crap but human ingenuity finds a way around little problems like these. I am waiting for the time when communities come together to build community-owned, decentralized networks nullifying the point of creating such laws as these. If the internet were really owned by the people, a surveillance law would be practically impossible to enforce. It just shows that government is afraid of the people and it should be. People should not fear their government.
  • by na1led (1030470) on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:55PM (#39020599)
    I guess all Canadians are presumed Guilty, until you can afford to provide your innocence.
  • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Monday February 13, 2012 @12:56PM (#39020617)
    Make if easier for the government to do its job. At the end of every day email copies of your internet activity to Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.
  • by jamstar7 (694492) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:01PM (#39020705)
    Yeah, Canada is getting more like the US every day. Sorry to hear that, guys. You had a helluva nice civilised country up there.
  • by adonoman (624929) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:04PM (#39020731)
    Oddly enough, he seems to be going with the line that opposing this bill is questioning the integrity of front-line police forces. Of course, I'm questioning the integrity of front-line police forces. The entire system is built around the fact that we can't expect to trust all individuals to behave.
  • by justforgetme (1814588) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:04PM (#39020739) Homepage

    It's a thinly veiled excuse.
    Just like the misconception that free distribution of independent literature would:
    1) turn the peasants into hedonists (Confucianism - moveable type press)
    2) put "the beast" into people (Catholic church - Gutenberg printing press)

    Well, the governments were "right" back then so they must be "right" now aswell.

  • by Baloroth (2370816) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:05PM (#39020749)

    Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said the law will give the tools to police to adequately deal with 21st-century technology, and said anyone opposing the laws favours "the rights of child pornographers and organized crime ahead of the rights of lawabiding citizens."

    That's quite right, actually, I do "favor" their rights. They have a right to due process of law. Any government official who says they do not favor the rights of any individual under the law is not fit for office, and should probably be impeached. One of those rights is to privacy from government surveillance without a warrant.

    Not that that quote even makes sense, anyways: anyone who opposes the bill favors the rights of everyone.

  • by SuperCharlie (1068072) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:05PM (#39020759)
    Just an observation... it seems that anything with great potential to be good to mankind always seems to come with something equally bad... maybe its some kind of conservation of benefit equality.. but if you think about it.. theres not too many things that come along with benefits that do not come with equal detractors. The Internet, with its promise of global communication and sharing has now become the tool for government control of the global masses. Sounds about right. Sadly.
  • by EmperorOfCanada (1332175) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:07PM (#39020783)
    I love how they are always trying to protect the children when all they want is to make their jobs easier. Can you imagine if say Coca cola were able to make laws. How many laws would they pass to make selling cola easier?
    What this all boils down to is that they have all the tools they already need to nail organized crime as any judge will sign warrants for that. Where the judges are "uncooperative" is when it comes to trolling to see if protesters are planning on embarrassing the government or police.
    What Canadians want is more protection of our rights and more exposure of what the police and government are hiding. This law proposes the exact opposite.
    I can't imagine the surveillance they will now rain down on someone who say does a freedom of information request on the RCMP. A situation that no judge in a million years would agree to.
    A good example of a law that most Canadians would want is that the police can't use a drone without a warrant. I don't want them peeking over my bushes.
  • Too Late. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bedwards (1937210) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:13PM (#39020875)

    We have a myriad of technical solutions to this problem.

    Tor and the .onion domains effectually neutralise the ability of a third party (The state or any other organisation) to perform survailance on internet traffic.

    Freenet enables the disemenation of whatever material anybody cares to share, to anybody.

    Bitcoin allows unregulated trade.

    It should be our goal to spread these existing tools and develop new methods of ensuring information can be transferred between people without fear, censorship, or interferance of any other person.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:19PM (#39020951)

    We did this to ourselves, you know. Canada had three chances to toss the Harper government out, and the third time, we handed them a majority despite their myriad offences that would have toppled prior governments (butchering Statistics Canada, running endless attack ads, blowing a billion dollars turning Toronto into a police state for the G20, proroguing parliament to avoid answering difficult questions, complicity in torture of Afghan detainees, being found in contempt of parliament... And these are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head). As a nation, we deserve exactly what we're getting for not turfing that clown Harper at the first opportunity.

  • I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Xacid (560407) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:27PM (#39021055) Journal

    I don't understand what it is with this recent(?) obsession with wanting to bypass warrants? It just outright baffles and frustrates me.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:34PM (#39021173)

    Only a moron would think that conservative or liberal has anything to do with it. You need to open your eyes to the fact that ALL politicians the world over are in it for their own benefit. Chances are, in this case, that these laws are motivated by the intellectual property lobby.

  • Can you imagine if say Coca cola were able to make laws[?]

    They'd classify Pepsi as a Class 1 controlled substance and have the DEA enforce its prohibition. Wait, didn't this happen with the timber industry?

  • by 0123456 (636235) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:41PM (#39021239)

    I don't understand what it is with this recent(?) obsession with wanting to bypass warrants?

    How can you build a police state if you need a warrant to spy on everyone?

  • by 0123456 (636235) on Monday February 13, 2012 @01:49PM (#39021381)

    You can't vote a government out, you can only vote another government in... and they would probably be doing pretty much the same as this one.

    And Canada was doing OK with a minority government until the left decided to commit suicide by forcing yet another election that no-one wanted. That has to be one of the worst 'shot myself in the ass' moments in political history.

  • Sign the petition (Score:5, Insightful)

    by alexo (9335) on Monday February 13, 2012 @02:10PM (#39021747) Journal

    This may be close to your last chance to be an anonymous coward, so sign the petition at openmedia,
    http://openmedia.ca/StopSpying [openmedia.ca]

    And don't forget to donate as well

  • by kawabago (551139) on Monday February 13, 2012 @02:36PM (#39022241)
    Ubiquitous surveillance catches misdeeds on both sides, this is very much a "Be careful what you wish for!" situation. This will create a whole new class of criminals specializing stealing everyone's stored information. If legislation like this is enacted I predict the rise of a peer to peer internet that circumvents ISPs entirely.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13, 2012 @03:53PM (#39023475)

    Yes you can. We Americans did it a few hundred years ago at the tip of a bayonet.

    And seem to have forgoten how since then.

"I have more information in one place than anybody in the world." -- Jerry Pournelle, an absurd notion, apparently about the BIX BBS

Working...