Opinion: Canadian C-18 is an Example and Warning for Artificial Intelligence

Prompted by Greg Walters

Vertical Divider

​​Bill C-18, Canada's Online News Act, emerges as a contentious piece of legislation, stirring significant debate far beyond the boundaries of digital news content and into the burgeoning realm of artificial intelligence (AI).

Ostensibly designed to ensure fair compensation for news publishers from tech giants that share their content, the implications of such a bill extend into the arena of AI, prompting a conversation about censorship, innovation, and the free flow of information.

This legislation serves as a reminder of the balance between protecting content creators and stifling the very innovation that propels society forward.

​It's a fine line between ensuring fair compensation and inadvertently creating a walled garden that limits access to information—a cornerstone upon which AI, particularly large language models, is built.

---

The concerns around Bill C-18 are not unfounded. By mandating tech platforms to negotiate compensation deals with news publishers, there's a veiled threat of censorship and selective information sharing. This framework could easily extend into the AI sphere, where algorithms could be pressured or legally mandated to prioritize or deprioritize certain types of information. Such a precedent threatens the essence of AI development, which thrives on the diversity and richness of data.

Moreover, the attempt to control and monetize the flow of information may hinder the collaborative spirit that has been pivotal in the AI revolution. Knowledge sharing, an essential driver of AI advancements, could be compromised, slowing innovation and potentially leading to a fragmented internet where access to information is dictated not by the pursuit of knowledge, but by financial agreements and legal boundaries.

Imagine an AI landscape where models are trained on curated datasets, shaped by commercial agreements rather than the comprehensive and unbridled scope of human knowledge. The risk here is not just about the impoverishment of AI's learning base but also about the creation of echo chambers, where the outputs of large language models reflect a narrow slice of human experience, dictated by those who hold the keys to the walled gardens of information.

Furthermore, Bill C-18's approach to managing digital content highlights a broader issue: the challenge of regulating emerging technologies without stifling their potential. It underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of technology and its implications, where legislation fosters innovation while protecting the rights and contributions of all stakeholders.

While the intentions behind Bill C-18 may be to protect the interests of news publishers, its ramifications for the AI domain cannot be overlooked. It serves as a cautionary tale of how attempts to regulate the digital ecosystem could inadvertently hamper the growth and ethical development of AI technologies. As we stand on the precipice of significant advancements in AI, it's imperative to foster an environment that encourages innovation, respects freedom of information, and ensures equitable access to the digital commons.

​This is not just about protecting the future of AI; it's about ensuring the future we're building is one where knowledge remains as free and accessible as the air we breathe.

---

What is Bill C-18

​Bill C-18, also known as the Online News Act, is designed to address the financial imbalances between news publishers and major digital platforms like Google and Facebook by requiring these platforms to compensate news publishers for their content.

The bill has several key components that aim to support the Canadian news industry:

1. Determination of Imbalance: The bill establishes criteria to determine a "significant imbalance" between digital news intermediaries (like social media platforms) and news businesses, considering factors like market position and strategic advantage​​.
2. Notification and Exemption Process: Digital news intermediaries are required to notify the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) if they fall under the Act's scope. The CRTC can exempt operators from the Act if they have agreements with news businesses that provide fair compensation and support for news content production​​.
3. Bargaining and Arbitration: A formal bargaining process is outlined, where news businesses and digital platforms can negotiate compensation. If an agreement isn't reached, the parties can engage in final-offer arbitration. This process also details copyright considerations, ensuring news content is appropriately compensated for​​.
4. Impact and Response: The enactment of Bill C-18 has led to varied responses from stakeholders. Digital platforms like Meta (Facebook's parent company) have pushed back by blocking news content for Canadian users. In contrast, the federal government and some companies have ceased advertising on these platforms in reaction. This bill has stirred debate regarding its impact on news distribution, with concerns about reduced site traffic for news publishers and potential shifts in how Canadians access news​​.
5. Future Implications: The full impact of Bill C-18 is still being assessed. It could lead to a shift in news consumption habits, with Canadians possibly turning to alternative news sources or platforms unaffected by the Act. Despite initial resistance from some digital platforms, the overarching goal is to ensure fair compensation for news publishers and sustain the Canadian news ecosystem​​.

​Bill C-18 represents a significant effort to recalibrate the relationship between news media and digital platforms, aiming to ensure the viability of the news industry in the digital age. Its success and broader implications for news consumption, digital platform operations, and the sustainability of the news industry in Canada remain to be fully realized as stakeholders continue to navigate the changes it brings.

---

Prompt:

​I'm seeking your perspective on C-18, which I believe is fundamentally flawed. This legislation appears to signal a cautionary tale in the discourse surrounding artificial intelligence—highlighting potential risks of censorship, the hindrance of knowledge sharing, and the efforts to control access to AI technologies and influence the outputs of large language models. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on how this bill could set a concerning precedent for the future of AI development and its implications for both creators and users.

Use this article in your research:

ttps://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/understanding-bill-c-18-canada-s-online-news-act-and-its-proposed-rules-explained-1.6488532 https://www.jurist.org/news/2024/01/canada-dispatch-federal-court-judge-rules-government-lacked-authority-to-invoke-emergencies-act-over-freedom-convoy-breached-charter-rights/ ​