Internet & Technology

APPEAL WATCH: Lights, Camera, Action - Competition Tribunal applies drip pricing provision

In Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v Cineplex Inc., 2024 Comp Trib 5 [Cineplex], the Competition Tribunal (“Tribunal”) levied penalties of nearly $40 million dollars against Cineplex Inc., finding that Cineplex Inc. made price misrepresentations through its digital ticket purchasing platforms. The decision marks the first contested proceeding involving the recently enacted “drip pricing” deceptive marketing […]

Negligence Not Sufficient: The ONCA Narrows the Intrusion Upon Seclusion Tort in Owsianik v Equifax Canada Co

In Owsianik v Equifax Canada Co., 2022 ONCA 813 [Equifax], the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) clarified the scope of the intrusion upon seclusion tort. In dismissing three separate appeals to certify class proceedings, the Court held that negligence leading to a third party committing intrusion upon seclusion does not itself amount to the tort […]

Defamation in the Twitterverse: Levant v Day

Introduction It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them. – Mark Twain, Following the Equator What does harm to the reputation of a polarizing public figure entail? What is the […]

Rogers Communications Inc v Voltage Pictures: Balancing Privacy and (Intellectual) Property Protection

This case has already been covered in detail by Nicole Daniels here. The case—and that post—focus more on the issue of who should bear liability for the costs of actions undertaken to combat infringement. This post focuses on the underlying reasons the SCC may have had in reaching their decision. Rogers Communications Inc v Voltage […]

Google v Equustek: An Attempt to Domestically Govern a Global Resource

On June 28, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada released Google Inc v Equustek Solutions Inc, 2017 SCC 34 [Google] which granted a worldwide interlocutory injunction against Google Inc. (“Google”), ordering it to remove a company’s website from its global search engines. The Court’s decision in Equustek provides new tools to intellectual property owners to […]

Vancouver Community College v Vancouver Career College: Rights of Trademark Owners versus Online Advertising

Canadian legislation differentiates between “official marks” and “trademarks.” The Trade-marks Act, RSC 1985, c T-13 [TMA] legislates both trademarks and official marks. Any entity which qualifies as a “public authority” may request that the Registrar of Trademarks give public notice of the adoption of a mark by that entity. The process of giving notice does not require an […]

B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association v BC (AG): #Sponsored #Ad

In the case of BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association v British Columbia (AG), 2017 SCC 6, the Supreme Court once again wrestled with the uniquely Canadian issue of limiting election advertising. The appellant was a non-profit from Vancouver named the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association (“the Association”). Its mandate is to […]

Google v Equustek: Courts Still Don’t Understand the Internet

On December 6th, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) heard the case of Google v Equustek. The SCC is being tasked with defining the legal obligations of online intermediaries such as Google. In coming up with these definitions, the SCC must also answer difficult questions surrounding the regulation of illegality on the internet – […]

R v Elliott: An Unhinged Use of Hashtags

In R v Elliott, 2016 ONCJ 35 [Elliott], Gregory Elliott was found not guilty of criminally harassing two women by repeatedly communicating with them via Twitter through various hashtags they had created. In my view, Mr. Elliott fulfills the definition of a “Twitter troll” and I find his opinions personally offensive. But is the fact […]

R v Rogers Communications: Some Guidelines for Big Brother

In R v Rogers Communications, 2016 ONSC 70 [Rogers], Justice John Sproat of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice provided some much needed guidance to police and issuing justices when handling production orders for “tower dumps.” Sought by investigators through a court order, tower dumps occur when a telecom company is compelled to provide the […]