British Columbia’s Attorney General expressed deep concern over a legal challenge by social media company X against a directive to remove a non-consensual intimate image from the internet. Niki Sharma emphasized that the company is contesting a clear order from B.C.’s Civil Resolution Tribunal to take down the image for violating the province’s Intimate Images Protection Act. The tribunal had instructed X Corp., previously known as Twitter, to delete the image following an application for a protection order by a transgender complainant from B.C., whose identity remains confidential in legal documents.
In response to the tribunal’s order, X Corp. claimed it promptly adhered by restricting access to the image in Canada but not globally, using a practice known as “geo-blocking.” Subsequently, the tribunal imposed a $100,000 penalty on the company in September for failing to remove the image globally, arguing that limiting access only in Canada while allowing visibility elsewhere was inadequate.
X’s court filing argued against a “global blocking order,” contending that such an order would infringe upon the sovereignty of foreign nations and pose a threat to free speech worldwide. The company raised concerns that endorsing global blocking orders could empower hostile foreign nations to demand the removal of statements made by Canadian leaders. The petition warned that if various countries could issue global blocking orders based on their laws, the internet might only display content compliant with the strictest nation’s regulations.
The company further alleged that such orders could establish a dangerous precedent, legitimizing authoritarian practices that undermine freedom of speech and information access. In response, the complainant labeled the company’s petition as an abuse of process and an indirect challenge to the tribunal’s lawful directive.
Attorney General Sharma announced the province’s decision to intervene in the case to uphold the intimate images law, stating that under B.C. legislation, images must be expunged upon court orders without exceptions. She emphasized that restricting access solely within Canadian borders is insufficient, advocating for comprehensive protection for survivors of non-consensual intimate image sharing.
