Late this afternoon, the Canadian Internet Registration Authority, which manages the dot-ca domain, issued an important public letter to ICANN. As a CIRA board member for the past five years, I'm particularly proud of this letter as the organization has publicly called on ICANN to follow accountable, transparent, and fair […]
Latest Posts
Commercial Radio Review Comments Roll In
Rob Hyndman has a great posting on the CRTC’s Commercial Radio Review. With more than a hundred groups and individuals commenting so far (the overwhelming majority of which are not posted online, at least for now), I get the sense that the May hearings will be pure theatre with each […]
Government and Tech, Cont’d
Earlier this week, I wrote an article on the role of government and Internet connectivity. The NY Times runs a pair of stories today on the South Korean experience with active government involvement in technology. With the country a world leader in cellphone technology and people able to watch reasonable […]
UK Court Rules on ISP Liability
The UK Court, Queen’s Bench division issued an important decision on the liability of Internet service providers late last week. Unlike the U.S., which established statutory immunity for intermediaries where they simply provide the forum for publication, Commonwealth countries such as the UK, Canada, and Australia still rely on common law principles leaving some question about the standard of liability for intermediaries for allegedly defamatory content posted on their sites.
Bunt v. Tilley involved an attempt to hold AOL, Tiscali, and British Telecom liable for allegedly defamatory postings. The claimant relied on the Godfrey v. Demon Internet case to argue that the court could hold the ISPs liable. That case has generated concern among ISPs in Canada as it does hold out the prospect for liability. The court was clearly uncomfortable with that decision, however, issuing a decision that was generally sympathetic to the ISPs.
In particular, the court concluded that "an ISP which performs no more than a passive role in facilitating postings on the internet cannot be deemed to be a publisher at common law." That is the good news as it provides some comfort to ISPs who can rely on this case to argue that they are not liable for doing nothing more than hosting content.
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act 
AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 198: Richard Moon on the Return of the Section 13 Hate Speech Provision in the Online Harms Act 
Tweets Are Not Enough: Why Combatting Relentless Antisemitism in Canada Requires Real Leadership and Action 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 197: Divest, Ban or Regulate? – Anupam Chander on the Global Fight Over TikTok
