Category: Internet Law Page 1 of 3

Legislation Commented On: Protecting Victims of Non-consensual Distribution of Intimate Images Act, SA 2017, c P-26.9

PDF Version: Intimate Image Abuse in the Age of Deepfakes: Reforming Alberta’s Civil Legislation: Part 1

One in ten American teenagers personally knows someone who has had deepfake non-consensual intimate images (DNCII) of them created, and 6% reported having been victimized by DNCII (Thorn, Deepfake Nudes & Young People: Navigating a New Frontier in Technology-Facilitated Nonconsensual Sexual Abuse and Exploitation (Thorn: 2025) at 14). Recent incidents in Alberta demonstrate why intimate image legislation must address DNCII and its online distribution. In December 2025, a Calgary teen was charged in relation to DNCII of students from several schools. Six months later, two Edmonton boys were charged after creating and sharing DNCII of classmates. Reported consequences include job loss, school expulsion, post-traumatic stress disorder, and, in some cases, death by suicide (Mary Anne Franks, “‘Revenge Porn’ Reform: A View from the Front Lines” (2017) 69:5 Florida L Rev 1251 at 1259, 1263).

The Online Harms Bill – Part 2 – Private Messaging

By Sanjampreet Singh

On June 14, 2024

In Internet Law, Privacy

By: Sanjampreet Singh and Emily Laidlaw

Matter Commented On: Online Harms Bill C-63

PDF Version: The Online Harms Bill – Part 2 – Private Messaging

This is the second in a series of posts about the Online Harms Bill C-63, proposed federal legislation the stated aims of which are to reduce harmful content online, hold social media platforms accountable, promote safety and child protection, empower users and victims, and increase transparency.

This post examines the social media services that would be regulated by the proposed Online Harms Act (Act) and potentially investigated by the Digital Safety Commission. More specifically, this post focuses on what is excluded from this Bill – private messaging – a “wicked problem” in online harms where one is damned if you do or damned if you don’t include it. We propose a middle path.

The Online Harms Bill – Part 1 – Why We Need Legislation

By Emily Laidlaw

On March 6, 2024

In Internet Law, Law Reform

By: Emily Laidlaw

Matter Commented On: Bill C-63, An Act to enact the Online Harms Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, 1^st Sess, 44^th Parl, 2024 (Online Harms Bill)

PDF Version: The Online Harms Bill – Part 1 – Why We Need Legislation

This is the first in a series of posts that will unpack the Online Harms Bill C-63. In this first post, I will explain how and why we got here, as there is a significant amount of misunderstanding about what this Bill is about and why we might need it before the merits of this Bill are examined. It also important to contextualize the Bill within the law of intermediary liability, the law that applies to technology companies that facilitate transactions between third parties. Unlike many other jurisdictions, Canada operates in a relative legal vacuum in this space.

Online Age Verification is Crucial and Bill S-210 Gets It Wrong

By Emily Laidlaw

On February 5, 2024

In Constitutional, Internet Law

By: Emily B. Laidlaw

Matter Commented On: Bill S-210, An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to sexually explicit material, 1^st Sess, 44^th Parl, 2021.

PDF Version: Online Age Verification is Crucial and Bill S-210 Gets It Wrong

Age verification is a tool that verifies a user’s age before permitting them to access certain online content, websites, or apps. It is primarily advocated for the purpose of verifying the ages of users and creators on pornography sites. Age verification can have wider application and has been proposed as a solution to an array of child safety issues on social media, including algorithms pushing content about eating disorders, self-harm, misinformation, and viral “challenges”, to luring and cyber-bullying. For example, many platforms ban users under 13 years old and/or have child protection measures for 13-17-year-olds, such as blocking direct messaging, limiting screen time, or curating age-appropriate content. TikTok, for example, has such tools, but relies entirely on user self-verification of age and encouragement of parental oversight (such as their service, Family Pairing).

Bridging the Digital Divide: Encouraging Societal Participation in the Face of an Increasingly Digital World

By Hasti Pourriahi

On June 26, 2023

In Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, Internet Law

By: Hasti Pourriahi

Matter Commented On: Bank of Canada Public Consultation and the Digital Divide

PDF Version: Bridging the Digital Divide: Encouraging Societal Participation in the Face of an Increasingly Digital World

The Bank of Canada’s pursuit to introduce a digital Canadian dollar is often prefaced by reference to the necessity of this development, should digital currencies issued by other countries become widespread enough that they begin compromising centrally issued currencies. Most recently, in May of 2023, a public consultation was launched around a potential central bank digital currency (CBDC) which accepted responses until June 19, 2023. The Bank of Canada recognizes that a decline in cash use could leave groups of Canadians financially excluded, especially considering ongoing unequal levels of access to technological resources and advancements.