CdnFox Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/online-news-act-meta-facebook-1.6885634 Canadians will no longer have access to news content on Facebook and Instagram, Meta says The social media giant Meta has confirmed that it will end access to news on its social media sites for all Canadian users before Bill C-18, the Online News Act, comes into force. The tech company made the announcement on Thursday, the same day the bill received royal assent. The law will force tech giants like Meta and Google to pay news outlets for posting their journalism on their platforms. Meta said it will begin to block news for Canadian users over the next few months and that the change will not be immediate. "We have repeatedly shared that in order to comply with Bill C-18 ... content from news outlets, including news publishers and broadcasters, will no longer be available to people accessing our platforms in Canada," Meta said in a media statement. Well that's going to honk a lot of people off. They knew this would be the end result - i'm trying to figure out where they were going with this. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Nationalist Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 4 hours ago, CdnFox said: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/online-news-act-meta-facebook-1.6885634 Canadians will no longer have access to news content on Facebook and Instagram, Meta says The social media giant Meta has confirmed that it will end access to news on its social media sites for all Canadian users before Bill C-18, the Online News Act, comes into force. The tech company made the announcement on Thursday, the same day the bill received royal assent. The law will force tech giants like Meta and Google to pay news outlets for posting their journalism on their platforms. Meta said it will begin to block news for Canadian users over the next few months and that the change will not be immediate. "We have repeatedly shared that in order to comply with Bill C-18 ... content from news outlets, including news publishers and broadcasters, will no longer be available to people accessing our platforms in Canada," Meta said in a media statement. Well that's going to honk a lot of people off. They knew this would be the end result - i'm trying to figure out where they were going with this. I could care less. Quit using Facebook when I heard that tweenkie little shit Zuckerberg decided people could say anything they like about people he'd banned from his platform...which he stole back in university. Hey Markie! If you're there... fck you and anyone who looks like you...your platform is crap and you're a little pee-on. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
ExFlyer Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 I agree with Meta. It is a platform. If media companies have presence, why should Meta pay? The media chose to have facebook, instagram and twitter pages. Maybe they should be paying them? If someone on facebook cuts and pastes a story from a news source on their page, why should Meta pay? I can see and hear the crying if Meta , instagram and twitter start to ban media form their service... Who are the papers and CTV going to blame then for their dwindling reader and viewership. It certainly is not Facebook fault that it has become a staple of social media...it is the users. Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Michael Hardner Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 7 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: I agree with Meta. Interesting take. Although I agree with the general approach to letting business work it out, monopolies aren't a good thing. 1 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
ExFlyer Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 34 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Interesting take. Although I agree with the general approach to letting business work it out, monopolies aren't a good thing. For sure, monopolies can be detrimental to free enterprise but, when a company like Meta is open forum, they do not force anyone to use its platform. The choice is all on those that use it, including the media. If the media is losing money perhaps the media is itself to blame (in Canada for sure)? Why is the US not having this problem? The media there seems financially stable. Perhaps Canadian media is so stuck in the past viewers and readers are tired of it. Meta has innovated leaving Canadian media in the dust. My local news channels so stuck, they are laying off local reporters, the weather board is 25 years old. even their websites are not current, breaking news links are a day or more old. No, in my opinion, Meta is not to blame for Canadian news problems, it is Canadian news that are suffering from self inflicted wounds and poor bandaging. Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
SpankyMcFarland Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 I have never read news on Facebook. Who would trust that stuff? Like everything else on the site it’s not reliable. Quote
ExFlyer Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said: I have never read news on Facebook. Who would trust that stuff? Like everything else on the site it’s not reliable. Media companies like CTV, CBC, ABC, NBC etc most major newspapers all have dedicated pages on Meta. Then there are the people that put up links to those pages or stories from those pages. Having said that, there are lots of dubious news gatherers that also have pages. The decision on validity is up to you. If you choose not to read it, fine, if you choose to be selective, fine too. Do not misunderstand, I am on no way defending Meta, just saying that the responsibility for absorbing or believing content is totally up to the reader, you. Edited June 23, 2023 by ExFlyer Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Michael Hardner Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 6 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: For sure, monopolies can be detrimental to free enterprise but, when a company like Meta is open forum, they do not force anyone to use its platform. That's the point - monopolies and especially media monopolies create market anomalies that do a disservice to the consumer. In the 1970s you could have told the US Commerce department "Nobody forces you to use the phone" ... but they broke up the Bell companies anyhow. 6 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: The choice is all on those that use it, including the media. If the media is losing money perhaps the media is itself to blame (in Canada for sure)? Also - there's the McLuhan aspect to this, which is that we don't have a "choice" of how pervasive media changes society. You could have never in your life owned a TV but from 1960 onwards, TV made choices for you about how politics worked. 6 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: Why is the US not having this problem? The media there seems financially stable. Perhaps Canadian media is so stuck in the past viewers and readers are tired of it. Meta has innovated leaving Canadian media in the dust. My local news channels so stuck, they are laying off local reporters, the weather board is 25 years old. even their websites are not current, breaking news links are a day or more old. The US has a different view of media because they don't have a bigger US next door. Even Conservative Brian Mulroney had media written out of the Free Trade Agreement. Media conveys a point of view that is supposed to be a pillar of democracy, ie. that supports a national interest. If we allowed American companies a controlling interest in all of our media and all of a sudden there were essays everywhere extolling the virtues of joining the US you could see the problem. Facebook killed Cable News, which killed Network News, which killed radio, which killed newspapers etc. etc. You can look at the US government's approach to regulating Radio and TV via the FCC in the beginning vs their approach to the internet, and it would inform the landscape we're in today with regards to media. Canada is more conservative and more leery of open media. 6 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: No, in my opinion, Meta is not to blame for Canadian news problems, it is Canadian news that are suffering from self inflicted wounds and poor bandaging. The platforms are the problem, not the content. The Medium is the Message. 1 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
ExFlyer Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: That's the point - monopolies and especially media monopolies create market anomalies that do a disservice to the consumer. In the 1970s you could have told the US Commerce department "Nobody forces you to use the phone" ... but they broke up the Bell companies anyhow. Also - there's the McLuhan aspect to this, which is that we don't have a "choice" of how pervasive media changes society. You could have never in your life owned a TV but from 1960 onwards, TV made choices for you about how politics worked. The US has a different view of media because they don't have a bigger US next door. Even Conservative Brian Mulroney had media written out of the Free Trade Agreement. Media conveys a point of view that is supposed to be a pillar of democracy, ie. that supports a national interest. If we allowed American companies a controlling interest in all of our media and all of a sudden there were essays everywhere extolling the virtues of joining the US you could see the problem.Facebook killed Cable News, which killed Network News, which killed radio, which killed newspapers etc. etc. You can look at the US government's approach to regulating Radio and TV via the FCC in the beginning vs their approach to the internet, and it would inform the landscape we're in today with regards to media. Canada is more conservative and more leery of open media. The platforms are the problem, not the content. The Medium is the Message. I get what you are trying to say but, lets get sometime straight, Facebook is not media, it is a regurgitation of what the public posts. Monopolies in the past were split up primarily for financial reasons. As far as news media is concerned, we do have a choice. The internet has given us far more choices than we ever had before. The "mainstream" media has and is suffering form the huge choices we now have. As I said earlier, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter are not media, let alone news media. It only provides a platform for users (be they individual people or companies or news media) to use. If news media is upset with facebook, pull your pages off it. If anything, I think the internet has killed the news. News or wannabe news, has created so much competition amongst itself that folks no longer rely on their local news and go to a service they most align themselves with. For many decades my days began wit a bowl of cereal, my coffee and my local newspaper. Now that almost all media in Canada belongs to Bell media and CBC, I begin my day with a bowl of cereal, my coffee and my IPhone That is not Facebooks fault. I think we are now beating the horse we rode in on. Edited June 23, 2023 by ExFlyer Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
myata Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 So CBC won't be on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, etc. That's a good news, right? Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
Moonbox Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said: I have never read news on Facebook. Who would trust that stuff? Like everything else on the site it’s not reliable. I don’t either, and I’m actually on the news sites’ side for this. People who get their news off Facebook are a meme, but if the platform is going to be used by Facebook dumdums, I don’t see why Facebook should be the sole beneficiary of someone else’s work. Not being able to lazily have your feed confirm your viewpoints back to you is good in my books. We still have the Twitter zombies to listen to, so it’s not a total loss. ? 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Michael Hardner Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 8 hours ago, ExFlyer said: I get what you are trying to say but, lets get sometime straight, Facebook is not media, it is a regurgitation of what the public posts. Monopolies in the past were split up primarily for financial reasons. As far as news media is concerned, we do have a choice. The internet has given us far more choices than we ever had before. The "mainstream" media has and is suffering form the huge choices we now have. As I said earlier, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter are not media, let alone news media. It only provides a platform for users (be they individual people or companies or news media) to use. If news media is upset with facebook, pull your pages off it. If anything, I think the internet has killed the news. News or wannabe news, has created so much competition amongst itself that folks no longer rely on their local news and go to a service they most align themselves with. For many decades my days began wit a bowl of cereal, my coffee and my local newspaper. Now that almost all media in Canada belongs to Bell media and CBC, I begin my day with a bowl of cereal, my coffee and my IPhone That is not Facebooks fault. I think we are now beating the horse we rode in on. Social media is media, in the broadest and full of sense of the term. If you don't want to call it that then fine. The point is we are now in a different information landscape, and those ecosystems define how our democracies work, how information flows to the public, between individuals, and through the entire business landscape. You seem to be saying there's nothing to be done, and I guess that's a defensible position. After all these changes are pervasive and everywhere, however I'm pretty sure that the government has the power to influence the communication landscape by both positive and negative means. By that I mean by promoting new information platforms, and by restricting negative influences. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
eyeball Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 9 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said: I have never read news on Facebook. Who would trust that stuff? Like everything else on the site it’s not reliable. I've never had a Facebook, Instagram, Twitter etc account. Repolitics and it's precursors have provided plenty enough of a distraction. It's curious how many people seem to mistrust the news they see posted here. 9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: The platforms are the problem, not the content. The Medium is the Message. OTOH a person's brain is analogous to a platform and what many seem to do with the content they consume is to let it consume them. It's like self-inflicted brain-washing. Is it just me or can everyone hear everyone else hollering PROJECTION! Lol! I was a couple years ahead of most of my friends and family when it came to using a computer and the Internet and many of them to this day still ask me 'how come we never see you on Facebook?' I guess on some level I must have seen what was coming. it's interesting living in a small town where everyone knows everyone else and they're all on the Internet. Edited June 23, 2023 by eyeball 2 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
herbie Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 Good. Maybe it will convince the remaining dimwits that nothing on Facebook is news. 99% of what appears to be is clickbait, lies from Joe Dumbell's blogs and outright scams at best. Fine for gossip among friends, but that's about it. But the little it did post from legitimate media sources was free advertising for them, so go ahead and remove it. Why should they have to pay to advertise someone else's business? Quote
eyeball Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 We all know where this should end up. User-pay. Either with actual money or more advertising. That'll shut down the trash even faster. Unless they can wrangle a subsidy. Stay tuned or online as the case may be. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted June 23, 2023 Report Posted June 23, 2023 I was raised on rabbit ears and two channels...black and white... And yes it was uphill to school every day too, both ways. No one charged you for any content - everyone understood it was paid for by other content aka advertising. AFAIC and given the amount I'm being gouged by Telus, I'd like to see them paying producers for the content I'm provided. 2 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
ExFlyer Posted June 25, 2023 Report Posted June 25, 2023 On 6/23/2023 at 9:39 AM, Moonbox said: I don’t either, and I’m actually on the news sites’ side for this. People who get their news off Facebook are a meme, but if the platform is going to be used by Facebook dumdums, I don’t see why Facebook should be the sole beneficiary of someone else’s work. Not being able to lazily have your feed confirm your viewpoints back to you is good in my books. We still have the Twitter zombies to listen to, so it’s not a total loss. ? people are a meme?? How is what you post benefiting Facebook? That is you doing what you want to your followers. "Confirm your viewpoint"? You are trying to influence others with your choice of links on facebook., Be they links form someone elses facebook page or form the pertinent we pages. I now laugh at all those that were so pissed the government gave over half a billion to the media and now applauding that the government is throttling social media. Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Moonbox Posted June 25, 2023 Report Posted June 25, 2023 3 hours ago, ExFlyer said: people are a meme?? Anything can be a meme, and if you're getting memed about everywhere, then you're a meme too. Getting your news off of Facebook and/or reposting it (and especially if you argue publicly over it) is cringe. 3 hours ago, ExFlyer said: How is what you post benefiting Facebook? That is you doing what you want to your followers. The more time you waste on facebook, the more ad revenue they receive. 3 hours ago, ExFlyer said: "Confirm your viewpoint"? You are trying to influence others with your choice of links on facebook., Be they links form someone elses facebook page or form the pertinent we pages. Facebook's algos regurgitate your viewpoints back to you. Not everything that gets linked/shared by your "friends" shows up on your feed. It's the stuff you're engaging with that goes tot he front. 3 hours ago, ExFlyer said: I now laugh at all those that were so pissed the government gave over half a billion to the media and now applauding that the government is throttling social media. Okay. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
ExFlyer Posted June 25, 2023 Report Posted June 25, 2023 2 hours ago, Moonbox said: Anything can be a meme, and if you're getting memed about everywhere, then you're a meme too. Getting your news off of Facebook and/or reposting it (and especially if you argue publicly over it) is cringe. The more time you waste on facebook, the more ad revenue they receive. Facebook's algos regurgitate your viewpoints back to you. Not everything that gets linked/shared by your "friends" shows up on your feed. It's the stuff you're engaging with that goes tot he front. Okay. Bottom line is that Facebook, twitter, instagram, tiktok etc are all user driven. If they make money because people use them, so be it. Even the news media use their services. Why make a law saying they have to pay the news media that use the same service?? It is like those complaining that Jeff Bezos makes too much money and is too rich.... who made him rich? All the people that bought off Amazon. It is not his fault that people use his service. The new law is hypocritical and I hope facebook etc follow up with their threat to cut off all news. Watch the news media whine then LOL Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Michael Hardner Posted June 25, 2023 Report Posted June 25, 2023 27 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: Why make a law saying they have to pay the news media that use the same service?? It is like those complaining that Jeff Bezos makes too much money and is too rich.... who made him rich? All the people that bought off Amazon. It is not his fault that people use his service. Because of what we discussed: monopolies. Certain things will cause problems if they have a monopoly, or oligopoly. Like energy, food production and telecommunications. Information monopoly is especially scary, because we use information as oxygen to democracy. They can cut it off or only feed you what they want you to hear. Likewise, with Amazon - you have accumulated all the profits from all the local stores that used to make their living, and employ people, and put it all into one company. The owner of that company isn't taxed in the same way because of internet regulations, and so he accumulates... at times > $250 Billion Canadian. The idea of an open market is that innovation helps producers, consumes and the nation as a whole via "the invisible hand". If that doesn't happen, you are in the same situation that happened after the industrial revolution ie. not good. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Moonbox Posted June 26, 2023 Report Posted June 26, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, ExFlyer said: Bottom line is that Facebook, twitter, instagram, tiktok etc are all user driven. If they make money because people use them, so be it. Even the news media use their services. Why make a law saying they have to pay the news media that use the same service?? The same service? What? Nobody said social media can't make money. The news companies want to as well, and if their content is driving visits to social media sites, they want to be paid for it. If the social media companies don't want to pay, they don't have to. 4 hours ago, ExFlyer said: It is like those complaining that Jeff Bezos makes too much money and is too rich.... who made him rich? All the people that bought off Amazon. It is not his fault that people use his service. You're something like 120 years late on this as a novel argument. Standard Oil didn't get very far telling the US gov "It's not our fault everyone wants to buy our oil..." ? Edited June 26, 2023 by Moonbox Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
ExFlyer Posted June 26, 2023 Report Posted June 26, 2023 11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Because of what we discussed: monopolies. Certain things will cause problems if they have a monopoly, or oligopoly. Like energy, food production and telecommunications.Information monopoly is especially scary, because we use information as oxygen to democracy. They can cut it off or only feed you what they want you to hear. Likewise, with Amazon - you have accumulated all the profits from all the local stores that used to make their living, and employ people, and put it all into one company. The owner of that company isn't taxed in the same way because of internet regulations, and so he accumulates... at times > $250 Billion Canadian. The idea of an open market is that innovation helps producers, consumes and the nation as a whole via "the invisible hand". If that doesn't happen, you are in the same situation that happened after the industrial revolution ie. not good. I cannot buy this "monopoly" argument. especially when society at large is opposed to being told what to do. Your argument is that Facebook is a monopoly therefore government should make them pay for news that the users post as well as the media itself posts. People and businesses have a choice. Post or not. Amazons rise in the marketplace is also a choice consumers have made. To make Bezos and Amazon a demon is being narrow minded. Innovation helps producers get to market, it also helps retailers sell product and, most of all, it helps people/consumers with choices of where to buy their products. Government interference in business is so inconsistent and lackluster it is shameful. Why is it not stepping in with cost of gas? Why is it not stepping in to Bell, which owns most of the tv and broadcast and print media in this country? Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
ExFlyer Posted June 26, 2023 Report Posted June 26, 2023 10 hours ago, Moonbox said: The same service? What? Nobody said social media can't make money. The news companies want to as well, and if their content is driving visits to social media sites, they want to be paid for it. If the social media companies don't want to pay, they don't have to. You're something like 120 years late on this as a novel argument. Standard Oil didn't get very far telling the US gov "It's not our fault everyone wants to buy our oil..." ? Are you saying that individual posters linking media to Facebook should make facebook pay? Are you saying the news media itself having facebook pages should mean facebook should pay them? I am on facebooks side here. Shut them out completely. Problem solved. Then see who does the whining. Actually, in the end Standard Oil did very well when forced to split. As did AT&T. People decide who they do business with, not government. So, it was not OK for the government to give the media over 1/2 billion dollars but it is OK for facebook to pay media because you, the user and they, the media, use their service? Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Michael Hardner Posted June 26, 2023 Report Posted June 26, 2023 35 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: 1. ...society at large is opposed to being told what to do. 2j. Your argument is that Facebook is a monopoly therefore government should make them pay for news that the users post as well as the media itself posts. People and businesses have a choice. Post or not. 3. Amazons rise in the marketplace is also a choice consumers have made. To make Bezos and Amazon a demon is being narrow minded. 4. Innovation helps producers get to market, it also helps retailers sell product and, most of all, it helps people/consumers with choices of where to buy their products. 5. Government interference in business is so inconsistent and lackluster it is shameful. Why is it not stepping in with cost of gas? Why is it not stepping in to Bell, which owns most of the tv and broadcast and print media in this country? 1. You seem to be advocating against communication theory and its entire body of work. "Society is opposed to being told what to do." Well, maybe. And yet we have instructing, telling, informing, persuading, cajoling, lying - all in the PUBLIC sphere - in our social DNA since the dawn of civilization. Your ideas are very big and at odds with a lot of big ideas our societies are built on. I'd be interested in you explaining your theory on this, although I won't be able to debate it. 2. Well, not that the users post per se, but that they cite. And yes they would still have a post. 3. We don't allow unfettered free 'choice' in our society, because not all choices have equal impact on our world. 4. Some of this is true but innovation can also centralize power in one provider, which undercuts the purpose of a market. And a side point in case it comes up: Innovation includes practices as well as technology. Well, actually in terms of practices, the example I posted was that the US Commerce Dept (I think it was) busted up the phone monopoly in the US and in fact THAT helped led to more choices. 5. Canada has traditionally been less on the side of consumers, but both Canada and the US have stepped back in favour of laissez-faire in the past 50 years. Here's an interesting podcast on the topic. The key thing I took away from it is how LITTLE coverage this stuff gets from the MSM Corporate media... hey... wait a second.... CORPORATE media... hmmmmm https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/bonus-cory-doctorow-knows-why-monopolies-are-killing-art/ 1 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
ExFlyer Posted June 26, 2023 Report Posted June 26, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. You seem to be advocating against communication theory ......Your ideas are very big and at odds with a lot of big ideas our societies are built on. I'd be interested in you explaining your theory on this, although I won't be able to debate it. 2. Well, not that the users post per se, but that they cite. And yes they would still have a post. 3. We don't allow unfettered free 'choice' in our society, because not all choices have equal impact on our world. 4. Some of this is true but innovation can also centralize power in one provider, which undercuts the purpose of a market. And a side point in case it comes up: Innovation includes practices as well as technology. Well, actually in terms of practices, the example I posted was that the US Commerce Dept (I think it was) busted up the phone monopoly in the US and in fact THAT helped led to more choices. 5. Canada has traditionally been less on the side of consumers, but both Canada and the US have stepped back in favour of laissez-faire in the past 50 years. Here's an interesting podcast on the topic. The key thing I took away from it is how LITTLE coverage this stuff gets from the MSM Corporate media... hey... wait a second.... CORPORATE media... hmmmmm https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/bonus-cory-doctorow-knows-why-monopolies-are-killing-art/ I am not against communication theory. In fact, I am advocating it. We, the people, want free and open communication and object strongly against censorship. Making private industry pay for what the media itself is doing and for what people post is hidden censorship. I am not sure where I am at odds with the big ideas our society is built on. Innovation is generally rewarded...by our and the worlds patent process and, of course by the market. We have choices, read or not, consume or not, go or don't go, buy or don't buy. Government have let he market decide but now, they select where they step in. Is facebooks take on what is on the pages posted by users more important to Canadians than the price of gas being the same at all the pumps? Or that Canada has the most expensive internet/mobile prices in the world? Why not step in to something that actually affects us daily ...or are protecting newspapers more important? Bottom line, Canada does not have an anti monopoly law per say. We have the Competition Bureau that "support and protect Canadians by fostering a competitive and innovative marketplace." and "It is unlawful for competitors to agree or arrange to: Fix, maintain, increase or control prices (including discounts, rebates, allowances, concessions or other advantages) Allocate sales, territories, customers or markets. Fix or control the production or supply of a product". The Facebook issue is not in that category . That is why the government had to pass a new law. Edited June 26, 2023 by ExFlyer Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.