The Internet is ablaze with fury at the news that a content company – Voltage Pictures – is requesting the private information of thousands of Canadian Internet users, who it claims violated its copyright. Crackdowns on alleged infringement are sweeping the nation, as ISPs are being pressured to give private companies the personal information of their accused customers. This “guilty by accusation” approach to copyright enforcement is bad for free expression, and it adds new costs for Internet service providers, which will certainly be reflected on our monthly bills. Do you want to pay for a copyright witch hunt? As the definition of infringement expands, and everyday uses of the Internet increasingly include sharing images, videos, and more, anyone could be considered a potential infringer. If you or someone using your Internet connection—even someone accessing your wireless connection without your knowledge—clicked on a link to something covered by copyright, should your information be passed along? What if the accusation is wrong?

As law enforcement officials continue to lobby for the return of warrantless Online Spying Bill C-30, Ontario's Information and Privacy Commissioner is speaking out in defending Canadians' right to privacy online. We need to have our right to privacy protected – not compromised. Join us in speaking out against invasive Online Spying Bill C-30 at StopSpying.ca. Commentary by Ann Cavoukian, Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario As Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner, I have a deep respect for law enforcement. I frequently work closely with the police to help them succeed in fulfilling their important functions without sacrificing our vital right to privacy. The guidance I have provided over the years on the privacy implications of new technologies has given the police a roadmap on how to be effective, yet also protect our privacy. That is why I am perplexed by the ongoing disagreement between law enforcement and Canada’s privacy commissioners over the federal government’s highly intrusive surveillance legislation, Bill C-30. Repeatedly, privacy commissioners have identified a pragmatic and principled approach to fixing the flawed aspects of the Bill. Time and again, members of the law enforcement community have insisted they need overly broad powers, while failing to recognize that they can have both new and effective law enforcement powers, while still protecting the privacy of individual Canadians.