The Supreme Court of Canada yesterday granted leave to appeal in two notable cases – an appeal of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision that ISPs are not broadcasters under the Broadcasting Act (I wrote about that decision here) and the never ending saga of Tariff 22, which involves tariffs for music online.
Supreme Court Grants Leave To Copyright, Broadcasting Cases
4 Comments
Recent Posts
A Canary’s Song: What Antisemitism Reveals About the Health of Canadian Democracy 
Elbows Up With Europe Too: Why Canada’s Pivot to the EU Raises the Same Digital Sovereignty Questions as the U.S. 
A Century After Keeping Jewish Students Out, Universities Are Letting Them Be Pushed Out 
The Lessons of 9/11 We Forgot After October 7th 
Named to Canadian Lawyer’s Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers
…
Ummm ISP are communication providers like telephones, they do not really broadcast content in the same way then cable or radio.
But then again, the music industry where never good with understanding computer related technology.
As for paying a tariff… If I buy content on iTunes or Steam or another online service, why should I pay an additionnal tarrif to actually access said content? am i supposed to pay a tariff to allow me to leave the local HMV or Chapters with my purchassed goods?
@Anonyme
Agreed, but they are the low hanging fruit. Easier to go after them for tariff than the actual sites the offer up the streams.
Of course, with the convergence of media with the means of distribution in Canada this is becoming a bit more blurred.
RE: Anon-K
You mean the convergence of media conglomerate/TV/telecom monopolies. 😉
@Eric L:
In fact, Rogers is a great example of what I am referring to. They operate Rogers Cable and Wireless, which provide means of distribution, but they also operate radio stations in 6 provinces and TV stations (City TV, OMNI, the Biography Channel, Sportsnet, G4 Tech TV, TSC and OLN). Not to forget the publishing arm. (Source, Rogers.ca)