A meta-disclaimer can be defined if she thinks about Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne du Canada

Meta-disclaimer of information that determines what she thinks about Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne malgré le blocage des nouvelles de ses Plateformes.

She refuses to comply with the CRTC’s directives not to publish this information or provide detailed explanations for her confidential information. The decision came from the office of Heritage Minister Pascal Saint-Onge, an envoy with a “problematic message.”

“I follow closely the observation of the public interest, the legislation promises to be suspended by elections, as well as the mechanism for regulating la plus petite and la plus raisonnable,” and announces parole in a communiqué.

L’année dernière, l’entreprise – block of new Facebook and Instagram in response to Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne. Legislation Visait Meta et Google et aurait obligé Meta à indemniser les medias pour l’affichage de Leur Contenu.

Most often, users find contouring solutions to continue working on plate shape news, along with screen capture parts of press articles and copies of the text of articles in publications.

The Liberal government supports that the enterprise helps us think about the law on news on the line, but most of all it helps the CRTC determine.

The regulator, which functions independently of the government, is responsible for working on legislation. Le mois dernier, il a Accordé à Google une exemption de la loi en vertu d’un Accord qui verra Google verra 100 million dollars aux Médias Canadiens.

In my October debut, the CRTC was written in Meta pour lui dire qu’il “this information about relationships with individual lessons and current content sourced from Canadian media continues to be available on meta platforms in Canada.”

Il demandé à Meta quelles mesures elle prenait pour se conformer à la Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne, et si les nouvelles étaient disponibles sur ses Plateformes.

Bras de fer

After the enterprise sent a confidential response, the CRTC declared meta that verto de ses regles, Meta doit Fournir une détailllée des raisons pour lesquelles ses information devraient rester privielles, “y compris pourquoi le prejudice Direct especially what may result from the disclosure of information, which imports into the public interest in disclosure.” The CRTC is a specified meta code that contains a shortened version of the document that does not contain sensitive information.

Oct. 28, Meta Public Policy Director Dan Ball, fair waiver. A meta-declaration that the letter contains specific measures that the enterprise uses to ensure access to factual content that cannot be presented to the public.

“Il est dans l’interet public de maintenir ces confidential information that users cannot use to prevent the discovery of information that is supported by the meta and that ensures attention to the loi plutôt that guarantees respect for the celle-chi. »

He stated that “the integrity of the content of confidential information, relatives or commercial processes, is reasonable that Meta Entreprend to ensure compliance.” »

On November 7, the CRTC pointed out to Meta that this response was not sufficient.

He stated that the meta is not sufficient for the letter to remain confidential in the vertu de la loy on the new lines. The CRTC talks about how general statements of bias cause an enterprise to insufficiently and unsubstantiated “comment on the specific bias and direct cause à Meta l’emporterait sur l’intérêt public.” »

The CRTC states that the information continues in the letter “to permit public comment on meta-meta practices and on the issue of knowledge if those practices involve law that serves to advance the public interest.”

The regulator is in demand in Meta de rendre la lettre publique. In the opposite case, in the warning, Meta pourrait repondre et le CRTC determinerait alors si la diulgation est dans l’interet dans l’interet.

M. Ball, in a response dated November 12, stated only that “the details about the enterprise in the non-prior response containing confidential information are not supported by prior correspondence.”

The CRTC supports the response to the comment. Lorscon, at the request of the Council, provided public information, on his word of honor and a statement that “to determine the actual effect of the requested steps and to include a gesture of confidentiality.”

Meta – disclaimer, indicating response to the November 12 response to the CRTC.

To watch the video