Consumer Rights Wiki - User contributions [en]

Canadian Bill S-209

2025-08-17T19:53:23Z

AirborneBandit:

Canadian Bill S-209 is a bill introduced by Hon. Sen. Julie Miville-Dechêne, and is an updated version of Bill S-210, which was killed during the Parliamentary prorogation in early 2025. The bill, named "An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-28 |title=An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material |url=https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2025/sen/YB451-209-1.pdf}}</ref> , is the Canadian Governments attempt to restrict pornographic material to young people (defined as individuals under the age of 18, page four of this document<ref name=":0" />). The bill has key differences between the original and updated version, and mandates the use of government-approved Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access 'pornographic material', or risk the hosting website to be completely blocked from the Canadian Internet.

==How it works==

===General Overview===
The bill, introduced in May of 2025, aims to target organizations, as described on page four of this<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-2.html}}</ref> document, to force the usage of government verified Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access any online website that 'makes available' 'pornographic content'. Under Section 5, an Organization is guilty of an offence if:

"5 Any organization that, for commercial purposes, makes available pornographic material on the Internet to a young person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable, (a) for a first offence, to a fine of not more than $250,000; and (b) for a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $500,000."<ref name=":0" />

===What is 'making available'?===
In the document<ref name=":0" />, making available is defined as:

"making available includes transmitting, distributing or selling. (rendre accessible)".

This definition is extremely broad, and does not specify just pornographic sites. As seen in the next section, 'pornographic material' is also extremely broad.

===What is 'pornographic material'?===
As defined in the aforementioned document;

"pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

This definition is not just limited to pornography, but nudity in general.

==Why it is a problem==
By including general nudity as the definition of pornography, you include material on sexual health, gender orientation, sexual orientation, and reproductive health. This limits adult and young persons from accessing this material without having to consent to age verification or estimation services, and if you are a young person, you cannot access this content online at all.

Even though Section 12<ref name=":0" /> outlines very strict requirements for Age Verification or Age Estimation services, nothing online is impervious to leaks or hacks. Uploading sensitive information such as facial biometrics, age, address, social security codes, or public health insurance numbers to an online service puts the user at risk of identity theft, doxxing, and potential blackmail if such information was leaked or hacked.

==Defenses==
Under the Act, there are two listed defences;

"'''Defence — age verification or age estimation 7 (1)''' It is not a defence to a charge under section 5 that the organization believed that the young person referred to in that section was at least 18 years of age unless the organization implemented a prescribed age-verification 30 or age-estimation method to limit access to the pornographic material made available for commercial purposes to individuals who are at least 18 years of age."<ref name=":0" />

And;

"'''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)''' No organization shall be convicted of an offence under section 5 if the act that is alleged to constitute the offence has a legitimate purpose related to science, medicine, education or the arts."<ref name=":0" />

The first defence, in plain English, says that a company CANNOT use the defence that they ''thought'' someone was over the age of 18, having not used the Age Verification or Age Estimation services. The second defence is more easy to read, and prohibits the conviction of an offence of 'making available' 'pornographic content' for the legitimate purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts.

This sounds great, however in Canadian Law, defences can only be claimed ''after'' a charge has been laid. So an organization who provides such material for a purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts, much be brought to a federal court first to them lay their defence. But as described in the next section, there are some steps that must be taken before anyone goes to court.

==Progression of Regulation, with an example.==
If you are an internet website providing information on reproductive health for the sake of science and education, and a claim is made to the Enforcement Authority (EA), or the EA investigates you for 'making available' 'pornographic content', you will be served with a Non-Compliance Notice if;

"'''Notice 9 (1)''' If the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that an organization committed an offence under section 5, the enforcement authority may issue a notice to them under this section."<ref name=":0" />

Remember, under Section 5, an offence is committed by 'making available pornographic content'. Also remember that the term 'making available 'is highly broad, and 'pornographic content' is defined as general nudity<ref name=":0" />. Additionally, the EA must only have 'reasonable grounds', and no proof of evidence. So, having met these terms, the notice will be structured as such:

'''"Content of notice (2)''' The notice must state (a) the identity of the organization; (b) that the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that the organization has committed an offence under section 5; (c) the steps that the enforcement authority considers 20 necessary to ensure compliance with this Act; (d) that the organization must, within 20 days after the notice is issued, take the steps referred to in paragraph (c); (e) that, if the organization fails to take the steps referred to in paragraph (c) within the period set out in paragraph (d), the enforcement authority may apply to the Federal Court for an order requiring Internet service providers to prevent access to the pornographic material by young persons on the Internet in Canada; and (f) that the organization may make representations to the enforcement authority in relation to any element of the notice within the period set out in paragraph (d)."

But because you fall under the defence of '''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)'''<ref name=":0" />, you don't have to comply with the Age Verification or Age Estimation services, and twenty days pass. After this twenty day period, the EA submits an appeal to a Federal Court to block any and all internet access in Canada to your website, without a hearing, and before you can submit your defence.

So, because you were providing online sexual health education services in Canada, your website was shut down, and you will be going to Federal Court spending countless dollars of your own, and of taxpayers, to prove that you are in fact providing your service within the frame of education.

==Charter of Rights Violations==
In a Youtube video<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Fraser |first=David |title=The really bad age verification bill is back in Canada's Parliament |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBJe3gB2Po4}}</ref> by a Canadian privacy lawyer David Fraser, he outlines two Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms violations of this bill, the right to lawful access of information and to anonymity. The specific amendments in the charter are as follows:

Right to access lawful content:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2b.html}}</ref>. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to receive and access content, even if it's controversial (like pornography), as long as it's legal under Canadian law.

- '''Section 7 - Life, Liberty and Security of the Person'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 7 – Life, liberty and security of the person |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art7.html}}</ref>. “Liberty” has been interpreted to include personal autonomy, which could arguably include the freedom to make personal decisions about consuming legal adult content.

Right to anonymity:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2" />. The right to express oneself, including the right to receive and share information, possibly anonymously. Courts have recognized that anonymity can be an essential part of expression, especially online or when expressing controversial views. In some cases, courts have allowed individuals to use pseudonyms in court filings or remain anonymous to protect their freedom of expression<ref>{{Cite web |last=Naudie |first=Christopher |date=2017-06-08 |title=Calling John Doe: Can a class action proceed with an anonymous representative plaintiff? |url=https://www.osler.com/en/insights/blogs/classactions/calling-john-doe-can-a-class-action-proceed-with/}}</ref>.

- '''Section 8 - Search and Seizure'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 8 - Search and Seizure |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art8.html}}</ref>. Asserts a reasonable expectation of privacy, including digital privacy - like IP addresses, search histories, or online identities. This section has been the main Charter basis for protecting anonymity online. In R. v. Spencer (2014)<ref>{{Cite web |date=2014-06-13 |title=R. v. Spencer, 2014 SCC 43 (CanLII), [2014] 2 SCR 212 |url=https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2014/2014scc43/2014scc43.html}}</ref>, the Supreme Court ruled that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their internet activity, including who is behind an IP address. That means police need a warrant to obtain subscriber info from ISPs.

==Changes from S-210==
In the video<ref name=":1" />, David Fraser outlines changes from S-210. The main changes are:

- Definition changes of pornographic content, from Sexually Explicit Content in the Canadian Criminal Code<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-171.1.html}}</ref> to "pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

- Additions of Age Estimation services, in conjunction with Age Verification Services, throughout the document.

- Changes in Section 12(2) for the requirements of Age Verification or Age Estimation Services.

- Changes in citations within the document with respect to other changes.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Canadian Bill S-209

2025-08-17T19:51:11Z

AirborneBandit:

Canadian Bill S-209 is a bill introduced by Hon. Sen. Julie Miville-Dechêne, and is an updated version of Bill S-210, which was killed during the Parliamentary prorogation in early 2025. The bill, named "An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-28 |title=An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material |url=https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2025/sen/YB451-209-1.pdf}}</ref> , is the Canadian Governments attempt to restrict pornographic material to young people (defined as individuals under the age of 18, page four of this document<ref name=":0" />). The bill has key differences between the original and updated version, and mandates the use of government-approved Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access 'pornographic material', or risk the hosting website to be completely removed from the Canadian Internet.

==How it works==

===General Overview===
The bill, introduced in May of 2025, aims to target organizations, as described on page four of this<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-2.html}}</ref> document, to force the usage of government verified Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access any online website that 'makes available' 'pornographic content'. Under Section 5, an Organization is guilty of an offence if:

"5 Any organization that, for commercial purposes, makes available pornographic material on the Internet to a young person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable, (a) for a first offence, to a fine of not more than $250,000; and (b) for a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $500,000."<ref name=":0" />

===What is 'making available'?===
In the document<ref name=":0" />, making available is defined as:

"making available includes transmitting, distributing or selling. (rendre accessible)".

This definition is extremely broad, and does not specify just pornographic sites. As seen in the next section, 'pornographic material' is also extremely broad.

===What is 'pornographic material'?===
As defined in the aforementioned document;

"pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

This definition is not just limited to pornography, but nudity in general.

==Why it is a problem==
By including general nudity as the definition of pornography, you include material on sexual health, gender orientation, sexual orientation, and reproductive health. This limits adult and young persons from accessing this material without having to consent to age verification or estimation services, and if you are a young person, you cannot access this content online at all.

Even though Section 12<ref name=":0" /> outlines very strict requirements for Age Verification or Age Estimation services, nothing online is impervious to leaks or hacks. Uploading sensitive information such as facial biometrics, age, address, social security codes, or public health insurance numbers to an online service puts the user at risk of identity theft, doxxing, and potential blackmail if such information was leaked or hacked.

==Defenses==
Under the Act, there are two listed defences;

"'''Defence — age verification or age estimation 7 (1)''' It is not a defence to a charge under section 5 that the organization believed that the young person referred to in that section was at least 18 years of age unless the organization implemented a prescribed age-verification 30 or age-estimation method to limit access to the pornographic material made available for commercial purposes to individuals who are at least 18 years of age."<ref name=":0" />

And;

"'''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)''' No organization shall be convicted of an offence under section 5 if the act that is alleged to constitute the offence has a legitimate purpose related to science, medicine, education or the arts."<ref name=":0" />

The first defence, in plain English, says that a company CANNOT use the defence that they ''thought'' someone was over the age of 18, having not used the Age Verification or Age Estimation services. The second defence is more easy to read, and prohibits the conviction of an offence of 'making available' 'pornographic content' for the legitimate purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts.

This sounds great, however in Canadian Law, defences can only be claimed ''after'' a charge has been laid. So an organization who provides such material for a purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts, much be brought to a federal court first to them lay their defence. But as described in the next section, there are some steps that must be taken before anyone goes to court.

==Progression of Regulation, with an example.==
If you are an internet website providing information on reproductive health for the sake of science and education, and a claim is made to the Enforcement Authority (EA), or the EA investigates you for 'making available' 'pornographic content', you will be served with a Non-Compliance Notice if;

"'''Notice 9 (1)''' If the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that an organization committed an offence under section 5, the enforcement authority may issue a notice to them under this section."<ref name=":0" />

Remember, under Section 5, an offence is committed by 'making available pornographic content'. Also remember that the term 'making available 'is highly broad, and 'pornographic content' is defined as general nudity<ref name=":0" />. Additionally, the EA must only have 'reasonable grounds', and no proof of evidence. So, having met these terms, the notice will be structured as such:

'''"Content of notice (2)''' The notice must state (a) the identity of the organization; (b) that the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that the organization has committed an offence under section 5; (c) the steps that the enforcement authority considers 20 necessary to ensure compliance with this Act; (d) that the organization must, within 20 days after the notice is issued, take the steps referred to in paragraph (c); (e) that, if the organization fails to take the steps referred to in paragraph (c) within the period set out in paragraph (d), the enforcement authority may apply to the Federal Court for an order requiring Internet service providers to prevent access to the pornographic material by young persons on the Internet in Canada; and (f) that the organization may make representations to the enforcement authority in relation to any element of the notice within the period set out in paragraph (d)."

But because you fall under the defence of '''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)'''<ref name=":0" />, you don't have to comply with the Age Verification or Age Estimation services, and twenty days pass. After this twenty day period, the EA submits an appeal to a Federal Court to block any and all internet access in Canada to your website, without a hearing, and before you can submit your defence.

So, because you were providing online sexual health education services in Canada, your website was shut down, and you will be going to Federal Court spending countless dollars of your own, and of taxpayers, to prove that you are in fact providing your service within the frame of education.

==Charter of Rights Violations==
In a Youtube video<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Fraser |first=David |title=The really bad age verification bill is back in Canada's Parliament |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBJe3gB2Po4}}</ref> by a Canadian privacy lawyer David Fraser, he outlines two Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms violations of this bill, the right to lawful access of information and to anonymity. The specific amendments in the charter are as follows:

Right to access lawful content:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2b.html}}</ref>. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to receive and access content, even if it's controversial (like pornography), as long as it's legal under Canadian law.

- '''Section 7 - Life, Liberty and Security of the Person'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 7 – Life, liberty and security of the person |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art7.html}}</ref>. “Liberty” has been interpreted to include personal autonomy, which could arguably include the freedom to make personal decisions about consuming legal adult content.

Right to anonymity:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2" />. The right to express oneself, including the right to receive and share information, possibly anonymously. Courts have recognized that anonymity can be an essential part of expression, especially online or when expressing controversial views. In some cases, courts have allowed individuals to use pseudonyms in court filings or remain anonymous to protect their freedom of expression<ref>{{Cite web |last=Naudie |first=Christopher |date=2017-06-08 |title=Calling John Doe: Can a class action proceed with an anonymous representative plaintiff? |url=https://www.osler.com/en/insights/blogs/classactions/calling-john-doe-can-a-class-action-proceed-with/}}</ref>.

- '''Section 8 - Search and Seizure'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 8 - Search and Seizure |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art8.html}}</ref>. Asserts a reasonable expectation of privacy, including digital privacy - like IP addresses, search histories, or online identities. This section has been the main Charter basis for protecting anonymity online. In R. v. Spencer (2014)<ref>{{Cite web |date=2014-06-13 |title=R. v. Spencer, 2014 SCC 43 (CanLII), [2014] 2 SCR 212 |url=https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2014/2014scc43/2014scc43.html}}</ref>, the Supreme Court ruled that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their internet activity, including who is behind an IP address. That means police need a warrant to obtain subscriber info from ISPs.

==Changes from S-210==
In the video<ref name=":1" />, David Fraser outlines changes from S-210. The main changes are:

- Definition changes of pornographic content, from Sexually Explicit Content in the Canadian Criminal Code<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-171.1.html}}</ref> to "pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

- Additions of Age Estimation services, in conjunction with Age Verification Services, throughout the document.

- Changes in Section 12(2) for the requirements of Age Verification or Age Estimation Services.

- Changes in citations within the document with respect to other changes.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Canadian Bill S-209

2025-08-17T19:47:23Z

AirborneBandit: /* General Overview */

Canadian Bill S-209 is a bill introduced by Hon. Sen. Julie Miville-Dechêne, and is an updated version of Bill S-210, which was killed during the Parliamentary prorogation in early 2025. The bill, named "An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-28 |title=An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material |url=https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2025/sen/YB451-209-1.pdf}}</ref> , is the Canadian Governments attempt to restrict pornographic material to young people (defined as Canadians under the age of 18, page four of this document<ref name=":0" />). The bill has key differences between the original and updated version, and mandates the use of government-approved Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access 'pornographic material', or risk the hosting website to be completely removed from the Canadian Internet.

==How it works==

===General Overview===
The bill, introduced in May of 2025, aims to target organizations, as described on page four of this<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-2.html}}</ref> document, to force the usage of government verified Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access any online website that 'makes available' 'pornographic content'. Under Section 5, an Organization is guilty of an offence if:

"5 Any organization that, for commercial purposes, makes available pornographic material on the Internet to a young person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable, (a) for a first offence, to a fine of not more than $250,000; and (b) for a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $500,000."<ref name=":0" />

===What is 'making available'?===
In the document<ref name=":0" />, making available is defined as:

"making available includes transmitting, distributing or selling. (rendre accessible)".

This definition is extremely broad, and does not specify just pornographic sites. As seen in the next section, 'pornographic material' is also extremely broad.

===What is 'pornographic material'?===
As defined in the aforementioned document;

"pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

This definition is not just limited to pornography, but nudity in general.

==Why it is a problem==
By including general nudity as the definition of pornography, you include material on sexual health, gender orientation, sexual orientation, and reproductive health. This limits adult and young persons from accessing this material without having to consent to age verification or estimation services, and if you are a young person, you cannot access this content online at all.

Even though Section 12<ref name=":0" /> outlines very strict requirements for Age Verification or Age Estimation services, nothing online is impervious to leaks or hacks. Uploading sensitive information such as facial biometrics, age, address, social security codes, or public health insurance numbers to an online service puts the user at risk of identity theft, doxxing, and potential blackmail if such information was leaked or hacked.

==Defenses==
Under the Act, there are two listed defences;

"'''Defence — age verification or age estimation 7 (1)''' It is not a defence to a charge under section 5 that the organization believed that the young person referred to in that section was at least 18 years of age unless the organization implemented a prescribed age-verification 30 or age-estimation method to limit access to the pornographic material made available for commercial purposes to individuals who are at least 18 years of age."<ref name=":0" />

And;

"'''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)''' No organization shall be convicted of an offence under section 5 if the act that is alleged to constitute the offence has a legitimate purpose related to science, medicine, education or the arts."<ref name=":0" />

The first defence, in plain English, says that a company CANNOT use the defence that they ''thought'' someone was over the age of 18, having not used the Age Verification or Age Estimation services. The second defence is more easy to read, and prohibits the conviction of an offence of 'making available' 'pornographic content' for the legitimate purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts.

This sounds great, however in Canadian Law, defences can only be claimed ''after'' a charge has been laid. So an organization who provides such material for a purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts, much be brought to a federal court first to them lay their defence. But as described in the next section, there are some steps that must be taken before anyone goes to court.

==Progression of Regulation, with an example.==
If you are an internet website providing information on reproductive health for the sake of science and education, and a claim is made to the Enforcement Authority (EA), or the EA investigates you for 'making available' 'pornographic content', you will be served with a Non-Compliance Notice if;

"'''Notice 9 (1)''' If the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that an organization committed an offence under section 5, the enforcement authority may issue a notice to them under this section."<ref name=":0" />

Remember, under Section 5, an offence is committed by 'making available pornographic content'. Also remember that the term 'making available 'is highly broad, and 'pornographic content' is defined as general nudity<ref name=":0" />. Additionally, the EA must only have 'reasonable grounds', and no proof of evidence. So, having met these terms, the notice will be structured as such:

'''"Content of notice (2)''' The notice must state (a) the identity of the organization; (b) that the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that the organization has committed an offence under section 5; (c) the steps that the enforcement authority considers 20 necessary to ensure compliance with this Act; (d) that the organization must, within 20 days after the notice is issued, take the steps referred to in paragraph (c); (e) that, if the organization fails to take the steps referred to in paragraph (c) within the period set out in paragraph (d), the enforcement authority may apply to the Federal Court for an order requiring Internet service providers to prevent access to the pornographic material by young persons on the Internet in Canada; and (f) that the organization may make representations to the enforcement authority in relation to any element of the notice within the period set out in paragraph (d)."

But because you fall under the defence of '''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)'''<ref name=":0" />, you don't have to comply with the Age Verification or Age Estimation services, and twenty days pass. After this twenty day period, the EA submits an appeal to a Federal Court to block any and all internet access in Canada to your website, without a hearing, and before you can submit your defence.

So, because you were providing online sexual health education services in Canada, your website was shut down, and you will be going to Federal Court spending countless dollars of your own, and of taxpayers, to prove that you are in fact providing your service within the frame of education.

==Charter of Rights Violations==
In a Youtube video<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Fraser |first=David |title=The really bad age verification bill is back in Canada's Parliament |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBJe3gB2Po4}}</ref> by a Canadian privacy lawyer David Fraser, he outlines two Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms violations of this bill, the right to lawful access of information and to anonymity. The specific amendments in the charter are as follows:

Right to access lawful content:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2b.html}}</ref>. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to receive and access content, even if it's controversial (like pornography), as long as it's legal under Canadian law.

- '''Section 7 - Life, Liberty and Security of the Person'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 7 – Life, liberty and security of the person |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art7.html}}</ref>. “Liberty” has been interpreted to include personal autonomy, which could arguably include the freedom to make personal decisions about consuming legal adult content.

Right to anonymity:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2" />. The right to express oneself, including the right to receive and share information, possibly anonymously. Courts have recognized that anonymity can be an essential part of expression, especially online or when expressing controversial views. In some cases, courts have allowed individuals to use pseudonyms in court filings or remain anonymous to protect their freedom of expression<ref>{{Cite web |last=Naudie |first=Christopher |date=2017-06-08 |title=Calling John Doe: Can a class action proceed with an anonymous representative plaintiff? |url=https://www.osler.com/en/insights/blogs/classactions/calling-john-doe-can-a-class-action-proceed-with/}}</ref>.

- '''Section 8 - Search and Seizure'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 8 - Search and Seizure |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art8.html}}</ref>. Asserts a reasonable expectation of privacy, including digital privacy - like IP addresses, search histories, or online identities. This section has been the main Charter basis for protecting anonymity online. In R. v. Spencer (2014)<ref>{{Cite web |date=2014-06-13 |title=R. v. Spencer, 2014 SCC 43 (CanLII), [2014] 2 SCR 212 |url=https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2014/2014scc43/2014scc43.html}}</ref>, the Supreme Court ruled that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their internet activity, including who is behind an IP address. That means police need a warrant to obtain subscriber info from ISPs.

==Changes from S-210==
In the video<ref name=":1" />, David Fraser outlines changes from S-210. The main changes are:

- Definition changes of pornographic content, from Sexually Explicit Content in the Canadian Criminal Code<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-171.1.html}}</ref> to "pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

- Additions of Age Estimation services, in conjunction with Age Verification Services, throughout the document.

- Changes in Section 12(2) for the requirements of Age Verification or Age Estimation Services.

- Changes in citations within the document with respect to other changes.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Canadian Bill S-209

2025-08-17T19:47:00Z

AirborneBandit: Made a new page, hmu with suggestions of edits.

Canadian Bill S-209 is a bill introduced by Hon. Sen. Julie Miville-Dechêne, and is an updated version of Bill S-210, which was killed during the Parliamentary prorogation in early 2025. The bill, named "An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-28 |title=An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to pornographic material |url=https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2025/sen/YB451-209-1.pdf}}</ref> , is the Canadian Governments attempt to restrict pornographic material to young people (defined as Canadians under the age of 18, page four of this document<ref name=":0" />). The bill has key differences between the original and updated version, and mandates the use of government-approved Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access 'pornographic material', or risk the hosting website to be completely removed from the Canadian Internet.

==How it works==

=== General Overview ===
The bill, introduced in May of 2025, aims to target organizations, as described on page four of this<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-2.html}}</ref> document, to force the usage of government verified Age Verification or Age Estimation services to access any online website that 'makes available' 'pornographic content'. Under Section 5, an Organization is guilty of an offence if:

"5 Any organization that, for commercial purposes, makes available pornographic material on the Internet to a young person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable, 15 (a) for a first offence, to a fine of not more than $250,000; and (b) for a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $500,000."<ref name=":0" />

=== What is 'making available'? ===
In the document<ref name=":0" />, making available is defined as:

"making available includes transmitting, distributing or selling. (rendre accessible)".

This definition is extremely broad, and does not specify just pornographic sites. As seen in the next section, 'pornographic material' is also extremely broad.

=== What is 'pornographic material'? ===
As defined in the aforementioned document;

"pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

This definition is not just limited to pornography, but nudity in general.

==Why it is a problem==
By including general nudity as the definition of pornography, you include material on sexual health, gender orientation, sexual orientation, and reproductive health. This limits adult and young persons from accessing this material without having to consent to age verification or estimation services, and if you are a young person, you cannot access this content online at all.

Even though Section 12<ref name=":0" /> outlines very strict requirements for Age Verification or Age Estimation services, nothing online is impervious to leaks or hacks. Uploading sensitive information such as facial biometrics, age, address, social security codes, or public health insurance numbers to an online service puts the user at risk of identity theft, doxxing, and potential blackmail if such information was leaked or hacked.

== Defenses ==
Under the Act, there are two listed defences;

"'''Defence — age verification or age estimation 7 (1)''' It is not a defence to a charge under section 5 that the organization believed that the young person referred to in that section was at least 18 years of age unless the organization implemented a prescribed age-verification 30 or age-estimation method to limit access to the pornographic material made available for commercial purposes to individuals who are at least 18 years of age."<ref name=":0" />

And;

"'''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)''' No organization shall be convicted of an offence under section 5 if the act that is alleged to constitute the offence has a legitimate purpose related to science, medicine, education or the arts."<ref name=":0" />

The first defence, in plain English, says that a company CANNOT use the defence that they ''thought'' someone was over the age of 18, having not used the Age Verification or Age Estimation services. The second defence is more easy to read, and prohibits the conviction of an offence of 'making available' 'pornographic content' for the legitimate purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts.

This sounds great, however in Canadian Law, defences can only be claimed ''after'' a charge has been laid. So an organization who provides such material for a purpose of science, medicine, education, or arts, much be brought to a federal court first to them lay their defence. But as described in the next section, there are some steps that must be taken before anyone goes to court.

== Progression of Regulation, with an example. ==
If you are an internet website providing information on reproductive health for the sake of science and education, and a claim is made to the Enforcement Authority (EA), or the EA investigates you for 'making available' 'pornographic content', you will be served with a Non-Compliance Notice if;

"'''Notice 9 (1)''' If the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that an organization committed an offence under section 5, the enforcement authority may issue a notice to them under this section."<ref name=":0" />

Remember, under Section 5, an offence is committed by 'making available pornographic content'. Also remember that the term 'making available 'is highly broad, and 'pornographic content' is defined as general nudity<ref name=":0" />. Additionally, the EA must only have 'reasonable grounds', and no proof of evidence. So, having met these terms, the notice will be structured as such:

'''"Content of notice (2)''' The notice must state (a) the identity of the organization; (b) that the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that the organization has committed an offence under section 5; (c) the steps that the enforcement authority considers 20 necessary to ensure compliance with this Act; (d) that the organization must, within 20 days after the notice is issued, take the steps referred to in paragraph (c); (e) that, if the organization fails to take the steps referred to in paragraph (c) within the period set out in paragraph (d), the enforcement authority may apply to the Federal Court for an order requiring Internet service providers to prevent access to the pornographic material by young persons on the Internet in Canada; and (f) that the organization may make representations to the enforcement authority in relation to any element of the notice within the period set out in paragraph (d)."

But because you fall under the defence of '''Defence — legitimate purpose (2)'''<ref name=":0" />, you don't have to comply with the Age Verification or Age Estimation services, and twenty days pass. After this twenty day period, the EA submits an appeal to a Federal Court to block any and all internet access in Canada to your website, without a hearing, and before you can submit your defence.

So, because you were providing online sexual health education services in Canada, your website was shut down, and you will be going to Federal Court spending countless dollars of your own, and of taxpayers, to prove that you are in fact providing your service within the frame of education.

== Charter of Rights Violations ==
In a Youtube video<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Fraser |first=David |title=The really bad age verification bill is back in Canada's Parliament |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBJe3gB2Po4}}</ref> by a Canadian privacy lawyer David Fraser, he outlines two Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms violations of this bill, the right to lawful access of information and to anonymity. The specific amendments in the charter are as follows:

Right to access lawful content:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2b.html}}</ref>. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to receive and access content, even if it's controversial (like pornography), as long as it's legal under Canadian law.

- '''Section 7 - Life, Liberty and Security of the Person'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 7 – Life, liberty and security of the person |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art7.html}}</ref>. “Liberty” has been interpreted to include personal autonomy, which could arguably include the freedom to make personal decisions about consuming legal adult content.

Right to anonymity:

- '''Section 2(b) - Right to Freedom of Expression'''<ref name=":2" />. The right to express oneself, including the right to receive and share information, possibly anonymously. Courts have recognized that anonymity can be an essential part of expression, especially online or when expressing controversial views. In some cases, courts have allowed individuals to use pseudonyms in court filings or remain anonymous to protect their freedom of expression<ref>{{Cite web |last=Naudie |first=Christopher |date=2017-06-08 |title=Calling John Doe: Can a class action proceed with an anonymous representative plaintiff? |url=https://www.osler.com/en/insights/blogs/classactions/calling-john-doe-can-a-class-action-proceed-with/}}</ref>.

- '''Section 8 - Search and Seizure'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=Section 8 - Search and Seizure |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art8.html}}</ref>. Asserts a reasonable expectation of privacy, including digital privacy - like IP addresses, search histories, or online identities. This section has been the main Charter basis for protecting anonymity online. In R. v. Spencer (2014)<ref>{{Cite web |date=2014-06-13 |title=R. v. Spencer, 2014 SCC 43 (CanLII), [2014] 2 SCR 212 |url=https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2014/2014scc43/2014scc43.html}}</ref>, the Supreme Court ruled that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their internet activity, including who is behind an IP address. That means police need a warrant to obtain subscriber info from ISPs.

== Changes from S-210 ==
In the video<ref name=":1" />, David Fraser outlines changes from S-210. The main changes are:

- Definition changes of pornographic content, from Sexually Explicit Content in the Canadian Criminal Code<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) |url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-171.1.html}}</ref> to "pornographic material means any photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means, the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts, but does not include child pornography as defined in subsection 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code. (matériel pornographique)"

- Additions of Age Estimation services, in conjunction with Age Verification Services, throughout the document.

- Changes in Section 12(2) for the requirements of Age Verification or Age Estimation Services.

- Changes in citations within the document with respect to other changes.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Amazon to charge non-Prime consumers to use Alexa

2025-08-14T00:12:23Z

AirborneBandit: /* Consumer response */

{{StubNotice}}

[[Amazon]] has introduced Alexa Plus (Alexa+), an upgrade to the Alexa voice assistant that uses generative artificial intelligence.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Panay |first=Panos |date=26 Feb 2025 |title=Introducing Alexa+, the next generation of Alexa |url=https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/new-alexa-generative-artificial-intelligence |website=Amazon}}</ref> The Alexa voice assistant is also available on Amazon's range of smart speakers, such as the [[wikipedia:Amazon_Echo|Amazon Echo]].

==Background==
Consumers have widely embraced the [[wikipedia:Internet_of_things|Internet of Things]] (IoT) over many years, purchasing both control devices and controlled devices. Until 2025, Amazon had been pursuing a revenue model centred around the sale of their IoT units, culminating in sufficient sales, with over half a billion units sold<ref>{{Cite web |last=Garfinkle |first=Alexandra |date=2023-05-17 |title=Amazon has sold more than 500 million Alexa-enabled devices, drops 4 new Echo products |url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amazon-has-sold-more-than-500-million-alexa-enabled-devices-drops-4-new-echo-products-140013808.html |url-status=live}}</ref>, for the IoT services offered through their Alexa platform. However, this precedent was changed in March of 2025,<ref name=":0" /> when Amazon sought to restrict consumer choice and sell more consumer data, and introduce an Alexa+ subscription model to make up for a $25 billion USD loss from Alexa devices over four years (2017-2021)<ref>{{Cite web |last=Harding |first=Scharon |date=2024-07-23 |title=Alexa had “no profit timeline,” cost Amazon $25 billion in 4 years |url=https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/07/alexa-had-no-profit-timeline-cost-amazon-25-billion-in-4-years/}}</ref>. In March of 2025, Amazon Echo [[Amazon Echo changes terms of voice usage|changed the terms]] of voice usage, [[:File:Upcoming change to your Alexa Settings.png|removing the "Do Not Send Voice" feature]] at the same time as Alexa's capabilities were expanded with generative AI features.

==Adding a subscription cost==
Amazon has rolled out it's "Alexa+" subscription model, costing non-Prime users $19.99USD per month to access and use their Alexa devices, in comparison to the $14.99USD monthly cost of an Amazon Prime subscription.

This change comes at a time where many companies are adding a subscription fee, retroactive to user purchases, to access certain features.

===Amazon's response===
{{Placeholder box|If applicable, add the proposed solution to the issues by the company.}}

==Lawsuit==
{{Placeholder box|If applicable, add any information regarding litigation around the incident here.

===Claims===
Main claims of the suit.

===Rebuttal===
The response of the company or counterclaims.

===Outcome===
The outcome of the suit, if any.}}

==Consumer Response==
Generally, consumer and analyst sentiment around has been mixed. Comments on this<ref>{{Cite web |title=Amazon wants to charge a subscription fee for Alexa eventually {{!}} Ars Technica |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/amazon/comments/16t7hmh/amazon_wants_to_charge_a_subscription_fee_for/?utm_source=chatgpt.com}}</ref> Reddit post, among others, have been generally negative with users stating their discontent of paying Amazon to use a service they already bought.

Analyst Reactions

- Tom Forte of Maxim Group sees Alexa+ as Amazon's shot at challenging ChatGPT rather than improving Alexa. If executed well, “maybe we’re talking less about OpenAI vs. Anthropic and more of Alexa vs. ChatGPT” <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-02-26 |title=Amazon Unveils AI-Driven Alexa+ to Compete with ChatGPT |url=https://www.gurufocus.com/news/2716607/amazon-unveils-aidriven-alexa-to-compete-with-chatgpt}}</ref> .

- MarketWatch & TheVerge states that the Alexa+ model is bolstering Amazons' ability to monetize a platform they have lost billions on via subscription tiers and targeted ads, recognizes that there could be a larger play here to make Amazon a big game contributor to the AI/LLM arms race. <ref>{{Cite web |last=Tuohy |first=Jennifer |date=2025-08-01 |title=Amazon eyes ads and upcharges for Alexa Plus |url=https://www.theverge.com/analysis/717763/amazon-alexa-plus-ai-ads-revenue-subscription-plans?utm_source=chatgpt.com}}</ref>

- Business Insider suggests Amazon’s multi-year Alexa restructuring and layoffs set the stage for a premium tier. Premium Alexa could unlock significant new revenue if a fraction of users subscribe. <ref>{{Cite web |first= |date=2024-06-24 |title=Buy Rating on Amazon: Anticipating Revenue Growth from Premium Alexa Subscription and Margin Improvement |url=https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/buy-rating-on-amazon-anticipating-revenue-growth-from-premium-alexa-subscription-and-margin-improvement-1033500019?utm_source=chatgpt.com}}</ref>

==See also==

*[[Amazon Echo changes terms of voice usage]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Amazon]]

Amazon to charge non-Prime consumers to use Alexa

2025-08-13T23:49:30Z

AirborneBandit: Re-wrote that last part.

Brother Refresh EZ Print Subscription Service

2025-08-12T23:11:29Z

AirborneBandit: Capitalization, added some references.

{{InfoboxProductLine
| Title = Brother Refresh Service
| Release Year = 2021
| Product Type = Subscription-as-a-Service
| In Production = Yes
| Official Website = [https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/subscription-info#plans Brother Refresh]
| Logo = Brother Refresh 02.png
}}
{{ToneWarning}}
The Brother Industries Ltd.: '''Refresh Program Subscription Service''' is a Subscription-as-a-Service ('''SubS''') launched in August 2021. The program claims to offer domestic and business users the advantage of an on-demand, lower-cost printing solution that provides genuine Brother consumables directly to their door, without the need for end-user consumable management.

The [https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/refresh-smart-delivery Brother Refresh] service currently offers two programs: '''EZ Auto Reordering''' (abbreviated as '''EZ-ARP'''), where the end-user pays only to replace a depleted cartridge or '''EZ Print Subscription''' (abbreviated as '''EZ-PSP'''), where the the user pays per page printed.

Listed are the program features offered to the end user to maintain and service their machines:
{| class="wikitable"
!
!EZ-ARP
!EZ-PSP
|-
|'''Auto Cartridge Ordering'''
|Yes
|Yes
|-
|'''Free Trial'''
|No
|Yes
|-
|'''Payments'''
|Pay-Per-Cartridge
|Pay-Per-Page
|-
|'''Cartridge Type'''
|Standard or XL
|XL or Super XL
|-
|'''Shipping Costs'''
|>$19.99 Free
|Free (plan-based)
|-
|'''Warranty'''
|No
|Limited (plan-based)
|-
|'''Customer Service'''
|Yes
|Yes
|-
|'''Flexible Plans'''
|No
|Yes
|-
|'''Easy Cancellation'''
|Yes
|Yes
|}

==Subscription eligibility==
Brother currently lists [https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/subscription-info/eligible-printers/products#sort=%40productcataloglistprice%20descending these printers] available to enter the Refresh program. The printer can either be "Refresh-ready" (with Refresh EZ-Print Subscription ink and toner cartridges included) or activated post-purchase via the Brother website. Once the printer is activated and enrolled to the Refresh service, only cartridges or toner supplied by Brother can be used.

====='''EZ Print Subscription''' (pay-per-page)=====
{| class="wikitable"
!Printer Type
!Models
![https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/subscription-info Promoted]
!Free Trial
!Cartridge Series Disclosed
!Cartridge Yield Disclosed
|-
|Mono Laser Printers
|13
|Yes
|Yes
|Unknown
|Unknown
|-
|Color Laser Printer
|0
|Yes
|No
|N/A
|N/A
|-
|Inkjet Printers
|8
|Yes
|Yes
|Unknown
|Unknown
|}

====='''EZ Auto Reordering''' (pay-per-cartridge)=====
{| class="wikitable"
!Printer Type
!Models
![https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/ez-auto-reordering Promoted]
!Free Trial
!Cartridge Series Disclosed
!Cartridge Yield Disclosed
|-
|Mono Laser Printers
|141
|Yes
|No
|Yes
|Yes
|-
|Color Laser Printer
|31
|Yes
|No
|Yes
|Yes
|-
|Inkjet Printers
|0
|Yes
|No
|N/A
|N/A
|}

======False or misleading promotion======

*Brother clearly advertises color plans in the '''EZ Print''' program yet no color printers are currently eligible.<ref name=":1">[https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/subscription-info/eligible-printers/products#sort=%40productcataloglistprice%20descending EZ-Print Eligibility List]</ref>
*Brother clearly advertises discounted ink & toner in the '''EZ Auto Reorder''' program yet no inkjet printers are currently eligible.<ref>[https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/images/0/0d/Brother_Refresh_AutoReorder_printer_eigibility_list_08025.png EZ-Auto Reorder Eligibility List]</ref>
*Brother does not state cartridge series or yield on their website nor prior to enrollment in the Refresh program.<ref>[[:File:Brother Live Assistance Transcript 080225.pdf|Brother Assistance Transcript]]</ref>

==Subscription Claims==

=====EZ Print Program=====
Brother purports that the EZ Print subscription program can '''save the end-user up to 50%''' on genuine Brother ink or toner. This is accompanied by a caveat located in the legal disclaimer found at the bottom of the subscription information page.<ref>[https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/subscription-info Brother Subscription Information]</ref>

It states; "based on monthly subscription cost in U.S. for Mono Laser Power Plan vs. average cost per page of eligible like standard capacity cartridges. Savings will vary based on Refresh EZ Print Subscription plan selected".

======Obfuscated or misleading claim======

*No colour laser or inkjet printers are included in Brother's claimed subscription discount comparison.
*Only the highest-cost mono laser plan is used in Brother's claimed subscription discount comparison.
*Only a standard yield cartridge is included in Brother's claimed subscription discount comparison.

=====EZ Auto Reording Program=====
Brother offers a '''10% discount on all orders''' of genuine ink & toner when subscribed to the EZ Auto Reorder program. The Program also enables the end-user to select a higher-yield cartridge if required.

======Obfuscated or misleading claim======

*No inkjet printers are currently eligible for the '''EZ-ARP''' yet Brother promotes "Ink & Toner Delivered Automatically" on the program page.

==Subscription analysis==

=====Case study=====
[[File:MFCL2710DW EZ-Print.png|thumb|500x500px]]
To investigate Brother's claim for their purported savings in the '''EZ-Print''' program, we used the listed legal disclaimer as a basis for the setup:

#Mono Laser Printer: '''MFC-L2710DW''' <small><ref>[https://www.brother-usa.com/products/mfcl2710dw MFC-L2710DW Overview]</ref></small>
#Highest Cost Plan: '''Power Plan'''
#Standard Yield Cartridge: '''TN730''' <ref>[https://www.brother-usa.com/products/tn730 Brother TN730 Product Detail]</ref>

======Notes======
The Brother "Power Plan" includes:

*'''Credit $30''': for add-ons only
*'''Bonus Toner''' Eligibility: once only
*'''Drum Replacement''': undefined

It should also be noted that:

*The credit applies to any consumable or additional page cost outside the plan limits, '''not''' subscription cost.
*Bonus toner is supplied once and as a 'back-up' in case the 'plan' replenishment does not arrive on time.
*Drum replacement is not specified by Brother as to availability, frequency or supply discretion. In the case study here, the MFC-L2710DW requires a '''DR730'''<ref>[https://www.brother-usa.com/products/dr730 Brother DR730 Product Detail]</ref> drum unit which Brother states has a life-span of 12,000 printed pages.

======Printer======
The Brother printer chosen is the MFC-L2710DW. The rational for choosing this model for the case study are as follows:
*It is one of the most popular machines and has the highest number of reviews on the Brother eligibility list page.
*It costs less than $400 and is listed as eligible for the EZ Print Subscription program<ref name=":1" />.
*It has parts and consumables readily available from a variety of sources.
*It is suited to a home/small office environment and has automated duplex printing, 250 sheet tray capacity, 32 page-per-minute print speed, 50-page capacity automatic feeder to copy or scan documents, and wireless, ethernet or USB connections

======Analytics======
Market analysis shows that laser printers are the most popular machine for everyday printing:
*The average home office / small office user prints '''3.4 monochrome pages per day.''' <ref name=":0">West, McDonald (July 20, 2018) [["2015, 2016, & 2017 User and Device Printing Statistics"]] ECISolutions.com. Retrieved February 8, 2025</ref>
*[https://www.consumerreports.org/ Consumer Reports.org] reports their subscribers print a median of '''33 monochrome pages per month.''' <ref>Pinola, Melanie (2024) [https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics-computers/printers/are-printer-ink-subscriptions-worth-it-a4050339657/ "Are Printer Ink Subscriptions Worth It?"]. Consumerreports.org. Retrieved February 8, 2025</ref>
*Monochrome printing now makes '''up to 80% of total print jobs''' in a home or small office environment. <ref name=":0" />
*Colour printing has '''decreased in use by 34%''' over the 3 year period measured. <ref name=":0" />
By comparing the user data against the claim of cost-savings and stipulations in methodology from Brother, it is clear the scenario is one in which the choice given by Brother in '''no way matches a real-world situation or printing habits of the user'''.<ref>[https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/images/0/0a/Brother_FY2012_New_Product_Lines.png Brother FY2012 NPD]</ref> Furthermore, Brother engages in a purposefully misleading comparison when they state that the saving is based upon ''"''average cost per page of eligible like standard capacity cartridge"<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Brother EZ Print Page USA |url=https://www.brother-usa.com/supplies/subscription-info}}</ref> for they must compare identical products as only genuine Brother cartridges are supplied in the program.

======Assumptions======
To create a more realistic comparison we set rules to give the end-user a more reasonable, flexible and real-world choice when investigating print pricing, in our use case:

*The end-user keeps the printer for a minimum 12 months.
*The subscription is maintained for a minimum 12 months.
*The end-user runs a small office and prints 15 times the average page rate (6000 pages-per-year)
*The end-user has a broader choice of consumables.

======EZ Print cost comparison matrix======
{| class="wikitable"
!
!Brand
!Yield
!Price
!Pages
!Cartridges
!Total Cost
!Page Cost
!Generic Lockout
!Internet Required
|-
|'''Brother'''
|Brother
|1200 +-
|$24.99
|6000
|5
|$299.88
|$0.050
|Yes
|Yes
|-
|'''Staples'''
|Brother
|1200 +-
|$47.99
|6000
|5
|$239.95
|$0.040
|No
|No
|-
|'''Office Depot'''
|Brother
|1200 +-
|$47.99
|6000
|5
|$239.95
|$0.040
|No
|No
|-
|'''YB Toner'''
|Generic
|1200 +-
|$18.95
|6000
|5
|$94.75
|$0.015
|No
|No
|-
|'''True Image'''
|Generic
|1200 +-
|$19.50
|6000
|5
|$97.50
|$0.016
|No
|No
|}

======False or misleading claim======
As the above data illustrates, Brother's claim that the program can '''"save the end-user up to 50%"'''<ref name=":2" /> is purposefully misleading. They do this by using the following methods:

#'''Scenario manipulation''': Brother creates a situation where the user runs with the service for only a month, ending the program before the billing cycle before or prior to the auto-replenishment alert.
#'''Comparing different programs''': this is a clear misrepresentation. Here Brother relates Pay-Per-Page to Pay-Per-Cartridge, a false and misleading comparison. The matrix shows us that the Brother price is roughly half that of the next supplier, but here the user '''owns the cartridge''' bought from Staples and only the '''rents the ability to print a certain number of pages''' from Brother.

We note also that should the end-user run with the program for a year, then the Brother program is the most expensive option for printing.

======Brother EZ Auto Reorder cost matrix======
{| class="wikitable"
!
!Brand
!Yield
!Price
!Pages
!Cartriges
!Total Cost
!Page Cost
!Generic Lockout
!Internet Required
|-
|'''Brother'''
|Brother
|1200 +-
|$43.19
|6000
|5
|$215.96
|$0.036
|Yes
|Yes
|}
''<small>NB: Brother only listed here. All other competitor data remains identical to the EZ Print Cost Comparison Matrix.</small>''

======Validated claim======
The EZ Auto Reorder subscription offers the end-user a '''10% discount''' on cartridges while they are enrolled in program. This reduces the cost-per-cartridge by $4.80 when the product is supplied directly from Brother.

==Subscription history==

======Overview======
To understand the introduction rational of subscriptions within a traditional hardware company such as Brother, one must first understand how the changes in sales and profitability have historically developed within the markets that they operate.

======Brother Industries, Ltd.======
Brother was established in Japan in '''1908''' <ref>[https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/images/a/a9/Brother_Sales_Revenue_1928-2020.png Brother Sales Revenue (1928-2020).png]</ref> primarily as an industrial manufacturer of machine tools and parts. It was not until 1928 that Brother launched its first mainline product: a head-wear specific industrial sewing machine. Owing to their history in manufacturing, Brother's machines were good quality and highly regarded. They sold well and prior to the second-world war, Japanese companies like Brother had access to a productive and low-cost labor force. This allowed Brother to expand its product line and to firmly capture a share of the industrial sewing category; a market in which they still operate today.

The post war years saw significant Japanese government focus on industrialization.<ref>Mosk, Carl (August 12, 2023) [https://eh.net/encyclopedia/japanese-industrialization-and-economic-growth/ "Japanese Industrialization and Economic Growth"] Economic History Association. Retrieved February 8, 2025</ref> And by the early '''1960's''' and '''1970's''', Japan's electronics manufacturing sector was not only mature but had rapidly expanded. Facts such as a large national labor pool, new access to western technology and the skill-to-cost benefits from earlier government investment, quickly made Japanese manufacturers the leaders in high-quality, low-cost electronic products. Brother too, benefited from this economic environment. It invested heavily in the technology sector and by '''1971''', released a product that would change the company direction and growth into the foreseeable future: a high-speed, '''dot-matrix printer'''.

======Segment reliance======

Into the '''1990's''', Brother identified its Printing & Solutions ('''P&S''') segment as a global category for growth and shifted significant resources directly towards this market. And while Brother maintained its leadership in core categories such as industrial sewing, machine tools and parts, the company continued to make further gains through P&S and in electronic products such as labeling. The returns in these segments continued to provide Brother capital for expansion. They developed product lines that took advantage of broadening demand, not only through industrial buyers to whom Brother traditionally catered, but with small office and home office users ('''SOHO''') who began to purchase Brother's products for their high reliability and reasonable cost. By the mid-1990's Brother had a mature and robust printing portfolio and had released many successful and profitable lines:

*Laser printers (both colour & mono)
*All-in-one printers (print, fax & scan)
*Inkjet printers (high-speed color)
*Garment, label and mobile printers.

Throughout the late 1990's and early '''2000's''' the company continued to focus within the P&S segment and invested in long-term channel relationships. Now an establish brand, Brother's sales and profitability were firmly tied to the '''parts and consumables''' market. Brother understood that through channels such as OEM, vendors, distributors and large retailers, they could maintain strong end-user brand affiliation and leverage this to further create an ongoing demand. To acquire new industrial and SOHO buyers, Brother engaged in heavy promotional schedules and further product offerings. It introduced high-end, all-in-one laser printers and high-speed inkjet printers, all at price points not before seen in the market. Brother also sought growth in emerging countries. The company invested aggressively in Asia by promoting and selling low-cost '''monochrome laser printers''', which by now had became their strength and specialty.
[[File:Brother_FY2012_New_Product_Lines.png|thumb|504x504px]]
Then into the '''2010's''' Brother's previously positive financial results started to plateau. Its operating income and profits fell, and net sales, though marginally up, had failed to meet forecast. Furthermore, its Printing & Solutions (P&S) segment had not shown the growth expected, especially in Asia where they had invested heavily.

Despite these poor results Brother's strategy remained largely the same: '''grow in all business and all regions'''. It continued to push forward with its aggressive emerging market expansion and it increased mass advertising throughout Japan. Further products and solutions were added to the P&S portfolio including web-conferencing and greeting card software. Brother continued to focus on maintaining its US and EU presence through retail channels and seeking growth through new SOHO & SMB customers. Brother also increased sales staff, sales channels and supporting promotions in an effort to expand the sales of mono laser printers in emerging markets.

But by '''2015''' investors and shareholders had started to ask some tough questions. Brother had achieved net sales forecast targets in some segments but company-wide income and profit were in significant decline, The previously stable Machinery & Solution division was in free-fall and the anchor for sales and growth, Printing & Solutions (P&S), had suffered a 4.3% profit contraction.

In Brother's EOY financial briefing the company acknowledged the stagnation in the P&S market and offered the following insights:

#Global profitability in Laser Business Printers ('''LBP''') was declining due to competitor entry and generic consumables availability.
#The printer hardware market was now very mature and the targeted growth by new product releases was not returning profit.
#Digitization of documents, smartphone uptake and their affordability continued to shrink the printing market by 5% YOY.
#Multi-function Center ('''MFC''') and All-in-One ('''AIO''') machines were eroding sales growth of use-specific product lines.
#Consumables demand for conventional inkjet cartridge machines were being replaced by high-capacity Ink Tank models.

With these points Brother had informed investors that the traditional strategy of developing hardware products, releasing them through sales channels and then realizing profitability through brand recognition and consumables sales had become highly uncertain. Furthermore, Brother acknowledged that these strategies had caused model proliferation, driven up stock holding requirements, cannibalized profitable lines and may have directly encouraged the demand for generic parts alternatives.

Here Brother did two significant things. Firstly, it downgraded its forecasts to mitigate pressure for short-term market performance stating that the business would not return to overall profitability until 2018. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, it supported the profitability target by releasing a mid-term business strategy: '''CS [https://global.brother/en/investor/financial-info/archives B2018]'''. In this document, Brother outlined a series of broad changes. It advocated for restructured business segments and saw the need to relocate personal and investments. It wanted to consolidate internal divisions to create "synergies" supporting B2018 but all change, Brother stated, must underpin a common function and enhance the task of business model transformation. That is:

'''"To change and reposition the existing printing business to one that is clearly defined for corporate profitability enhancement"''' (Citation needed).

==References==
<references />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Brother Refresh Subscription Service}}
[[Category:Brother]]
[[Category:Subscription-based services]]

Brother printers causing issues with third party inks

2025-08-12T22:52:46Z

AirborneBandit: Minor wording changes, added a citation as requested. Lmk if it needs some more wording work.

{{IncidentCargo
| Company = Brother Industries Ltd.
| Type = Digital restrictions,Firmware lockout
| StartDate = 2025
| Description = Brother pushed firmware updates that degrade non-OEM toner's print quality - forcing consumers to buy more expensive genuine Brother toner
| Status = Active
| ProductLine =
| ArticleType = Product
| Product =
}}

{{ToneWarning}}
[[Brother Industries Ltd.|Brother]] has a reputation for allowing the use of third-party toner and being more consumer friendly than competing printer companies, such as [[HP]]. In recent years, they've implemented firmware updates that deliberately lower print quality when using toner that is not from the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). These updates disable colour registration & other features, encouraging the use of toner manufactured by Brother over other toner options<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Jacobs |first=Skye |date=2025-03-05 |title=Brother printers are quietly sabotaging third-party toner with firmware updates |url=https://www.techspot.com/news/107022-brother-printers-quietly-sabotaging-third-party-toner-firmware.html}}</ref>.

==Exploitative practices==
*'''Post-Sale Function Removal''' – Firmware updates retroactively remove previously available features, such as automatic color registration, for users using non-OEM toner.<ref name="reddit">[https://www.reddit.com/r/printers/comments/s9b2eg Brother MFC firmware update - non-genuine toner now disables critical features.]</ref><ref name="reddit-2">[https://www.reddit.com/r/printers/comments/w60687/brother_mfcl3370cdw_firmware_downgrade_needed/ Brother MFC-L3370CDW Firmware Downgrade needed]</ref>
*'''Vendor lock-in via DRM''' – Printers continue to function with third-party toner but print at lower quality unless OEM toner is installed<ref name=":0" />.
*'''Anti-consumer software practices''' – Firmware updates cannot be easily rolled back, preventing consumers from restoring lost functionality.<ref name="github-fwupd">[https://github.com/sedrubal/brother_printer_fwupd/issues/9 Brother printer firmware downgrade discussion.]</ref>
*'''Deceptive practices''' – Printers do not reject third-party toner but intentionally cause a toner failure, which discourages use of third party toners.<ref name="hackernews">[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31860131 Tell HN: Brother printers now locking out non-OEM paraphernalia.]</ref><ref name="reddit-2" />

==How it works==
1. Consumers purchase a '''Brother laser printer''' that previously accepted third-party toner.

2. A '''firmware update (e.g., W1.56)''' is pushed, which does not notify users of any major functional changes.

3. After updating, users notice that:

*Color registration '''fails automatically''', misaligning prints.<ref name="cups">[https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/CUPS/Printer-specific_problems#Updating_the_firmware ArchWiki - Printer-specific problems with Brother.]</ref>
*Brother support acknowledges that installing OEM toner will resolve the issue instantly.<ref name="hackernews" />
*'''Older firmware versions are removed from Brother’s servers''', preventing downgrades.<ref name="github-ohbrother">[https://github.com/CauldronDevelopmentLLC/oh-brother/issues/30 Discussion on firmware rollback for Brother printers.]</ref>

==Impact on Consumer Protection==
*Customers who were able to save money buying third-party toner are now '''coerced into expensive OEM toner purchases'''.
*Brother’s '''positive reputation''' for allowing third-party toner is tarnished.
*'''No prior warning''' was given to consumers before these updates were installed.
*Workarounds involve '''blocking firmware updates''' or attempting '''risky firmware downgrades''', both of which Brother actively discourages.

==Brother's response==
On March 5th 2025, following the publication of a video on the Louis Rossmann YouTube channel, Brother addressed the issue, in a response given to ArsTechnica, stating the following <ref name="ars-response">[https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/03/brother-denies-using-firmware-updates-to-brick-printers-with-third-party-ink/ Brother denies using firmware updates to brick printers with third-party ink]</ref>
<blockquote>
"We are aware of the recent false claims suggesting that a Brother firmware update may have restricted the use of third-party ink cartridges. Please be assured that Brother firmware updates do not block the use of third-party ink in our machines."
</blockquote>
They also detailed that
<blockquote>
"Brother printers do not intentionally degrade print quality based on whether a Brother Genuine or non-genuine ink/ toner cartridge is used. Brother cannot verify the quality of printing that will result when using a third-party compatible with a Brother printer."
</blockquote>
Finally they attributed the confusion from consumers to
<blockquote>
"Brother encourages the use of Brother Genuine ink and toner for optimal performance and reliability, and it is standard practice that we perform a Brother [G]enuine check when troubleshooting a Brother printer. Compatible supplies may range in quality, and in order to verify that a printer is working properly, we like to troubleshoot with Brother Genuine supplies. We believe this check in the process may have led to a misunderstanding[,] but as we confirmed, the firmware update would not be responsible for the degradation of quality or removal of printer features."
</blockquote>
==User evidence & reports==
===Hacker News Discussion (2022)===
*Users noticed that '''Brother printers accepted third-party toner but deliberately degraded print quality'''.
*One user stated:
<blockquote>''Brother seems to be apparently accepting the ink, but then purposefully making the print quality poorer.''<ref name="hackernews" /></blockquote>

===Reddit reports (r/printers)===
*A '''firmware update on the Brother MFC-3750''' '''disabled automatic color registration''' when third-party toner was detected.<ref name="reddit" />
*A Brother support agent confirmed that installing OEM toner would "fix" the issue instantly, proving that the printer was being artificially restricted.

===GitHub developer investigation===
*A project analyzing '''Brother firmware updates''' discovered that '''older firmware versions were removed from Brother’s servers''', making it impossible for users to roll back to a working version.<ref name="github-fwupd" />
*Another GitHub discussion showed that '''Brother firmware updates increasingly lock out more non-Brother toner cartridges with each new update'''<ref name="github-ohbrother" />.
*This is similar to [[HP Dynamic Security]] which block non-OEM cartridges.

===Quality Example===
[[File:Brother HL-L9310CDW 1.69 1.32 before registration deleted.png|alt=Brother HL-L9310CDW 1.69 1.32, before deletion of colour registration.|none|thumb|800x800px|'''Brother HL-L9310CDW 1.69 1.32, before deletion of colour registration.''']]

==Comparison to other industry decisions==
{| class="wikitable"
!Company!!Tactic Used
|-
|'''HP'''||"Dynamic Security" firmware updates blocking non-OEM ink
|-
|'''Epson'''||Ink expiration DRM, even when cartridges are full
|-
|'''Canon'''||Firmware updates that disable scanning when ink is low
|-
|'''Brother'''||Print degradation for non-OEM toner users
|}

==Potential legal implications==
Deliberate function removal '''after purchase''' may qualify as '''deceptive trade practices''' in multiple jurisdictions.

==Mitigations available to users==
#'''Avoid Firmware Updates''' – Disable auto-updates to prevent forced function removal. This may, however, lead to security risks.
#'''Try to downgrade''' – Some users have managed to roll back firmware, though this is increasingly difficult.<ref name="github-ohbrother" />
#'''HL-L9310CDW (with firmware main 1.69, sub 1.31):''' On the menu of the printer, delete the colour registration to improve quality by reducing the misalignment of the individual colours. However, the best solution is to have a configuration option to set the offset individual (X, Y) for each colour with the smallest possible increment, perhaps through an external (CUPS) printer driver.

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Brother]]
[[Category:Digital Restrictions]]
[[Category:Vendor Lock-in]]
[[Category:Post-Sale Firmware Lockouts]]

Amazon to charge non-Prime consumers to use Alexa

2025-08-12T22:37:01Z

AirborneBandit: Changed the tone of the article, cited more sources, deleted irrelevant comments, added some extra context to the subject.

{{ToneWarning}}

[[Amazon]] has introduced Alexa Plus (Alexa+), an upgrade to the Alexa voice assistant that uses generative artificial intelligence.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Panay |first=Panos |date=26 Feb 2025 |title=Introducing Alexa+, the next generation of Alexa |url=https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/new-alexa-generative-artificial-intelligence |website=Amazon}}</ref> The Alexa voice assistant is also available on Amazon's range of smart speakers, such as the [[wikipedia:Amazon_Echo|Amazon Echo]].

==Background==
Consumers have widely embraced the [[wikipedia:Internet_of_things|Internet of Things]] (IoT) over many years, purchasing both control devices and controlled devices. Until 2025, Amazon had been pursuing a revenue model centred around the sale of their IoT units, culminating in sufficient sales, with over half a billion units sold<ref>{{Cite web |last=Garfinkle |first=Alexandra |date=2023-05-17 |title=Amazon has sold more than 500 million Alexa-enabled devices, drops 4 new Echo products |url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amazon-has-sold-more-than-500-million-alexa-enabled-devices-drops-4-new-echo-products-140013808.html |url-status=live}}</ref>, for the IoT services offered through their Alexa platform. However, this precedent was changed in March of 2025,<ref name=":0" /> when Amazon sought to restrict consumer choice and sell more consumer data, and introduce an Alexa+ subscription model to make up for a $25 billion USD loss from Alexa devices over four years (2017-2021)<ref>{{Cite web |last=Harding |first=Scharon |date=2024-07-23 |title=Alexa had “no profit timeline,” cost Amazon $25 billion in 4 years |url=https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/07/alexa-had-no-profit-timeline-cost-amazon-25-billion-in-4-years/}}</ref>. In March of 2025, Amazon Echo [[Amazon Echo changes terms of voice usage|changed the terms]] of voice usage, [[:File:Upcoming change to your Alexa Settings.png|removing the "Do Not Send Voice" feature]] at the same time as Alexa's capabilities were expanded with generative AI features.

==Adding a subscription cost==
Amazon has rolled out it's "Alexa+" subscription model, costing non-Prime users $19.99USD per month to access and use their Alexa devices, in comparison to the $14.99USD monthly cost of an Amazon Prime subscription.

This change comes at a time where many companies are adding a usage subscription fee to already purchased devices, and reflects a broader change in sales models internationally. Ultimately, these changes pitch consumers to be able to functionally use less, or none, of devices that they have already purchased, decreasing actual consumer ownership of such devices.

===Amazon's response===
{{Placeholder box|If applicable, add the proposed solution to the issues by the company.}}

==Lawsuit==
{{Placeholder box|If applicable, add any information regarding litigation around the incident here.

===Claims===
Main claims of the suit.

===Rebuttal===
The response of the company or counterclaims.

===Outcome===
The outcome of the suit, if any.}}

==Consumer response==
{{Placeholder box|Summary and key issues of prevailing sentiment from the consumers and commentators that can be documented via articles, emails to support, reviews and forum posts.}}

==See also==

*[[Amazon Echo changes terms of voice usage]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Amazon]]