CRTC Issues Questions for Federal Ct on ISPs and Broadcast Act

The CRTC has issued the question to the Federal Court of Appeal regarding the applicability of the Broadcasting Act to ISPs.


  1. CRTC Issues Questions for Federal Ct on ISPs and Broadcast Act
    In light of the recent Net Neutrality Hearing and the request for the re-examination of the CAIP vs Bell throttling ruling this looks messed up.

    The CRTC seems to be asking questions based on their muddling of the terms ISP, Reseller and Wholesale and then asking the Court to rule based on this misinformation.

    If you ask an invalid question you usually get an invalid answer. 🙁


  2. Unfortunately
    the CTRC doesn’t seem to have the technical expertise necessary to do their job, or if they do the folks in charge are ignoring them. For instance, the calls for CanCon on an ISP. What next? The laws of electromagnetic propagation are changed to enforce CanCon? After all, the ISP provides the pipe to get the signal to the destination, just like a radio signal.

    That having been said, it does get into a grey area where the major ISPs in Canada are also actively involved in content production. This also has implications into Net Neutrality. Perhaps the best bet would be for the media concentration in Canada to be reduced or even eliminated.

  3. Maynard G. Krebs says:

    The CRTC needs to shoot all its lawyers
    In their document in section 9, the CRTC writes “9.
    …. The issue that arose in the proceeding is limited to whether ISPs are carrying on, in whole or in part, “broadcasting undertakings” subject to the Broadcasting Act when they provide access through the Internet to broadcasting requested by end-users. …..”

    The answer is right there…the end user REQUESTED content from a BROADCASTER. This is no different than a TV viewer flipping the channel to the local CBC station on an over-the-air link. CBC is the Broadcaster. The medium is the “ether” or more correctly electromagnetic propagation through air.

    On the ‘internet’, it’s still electromagnetic propagation being requested, only the medium of transmission is different – but that doesn’t make the ISP a broadcaster.

    Those clowns at the CRTC need to take courses in formal logic.

  4. Not screwed up at all
    This makes perfect sense. It’s a matter of jurisdiction. Remember that the CRTC serves two separate masters … the Department of Industry for the Telecommunications act and the Heritage Ministry for the the Broadcast Act. The internet is blurring that distinction in being content providers as well as common carriers. It comes down to which law applies and in what precedence if both apply.

  5. Vaudevillian says:

    Vary screwed up
    Putting it under the broadcast act will allow ISP’s more options to do what ever with their network and label the internet as luxury and not a telecommunications network. I use the internet dor everything I do. Running my business, you know things like phone calls, emails, advertising, news, gaming and much more.

    I hope the courts say no again. This is bell and rogers trying to get the internet under a tight noose.