Columns

Digital TV Transition Could Lead to New Digital Divide

In just over one year, Canada is scheduled to complete the digital television transition, as stations switch from analog to digital broadcasts. While cable and satellite subscribers will not notice the change, over one million Canadians that rely on over-the-air signals will be affected. Despite the experience in other countries that left many consumers without digital converter boxes staring at blank screens, my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues the Canadian government seems content to leave the switch to the private sector, implausibly claiming “industry-led solutions will ensure a smooth transition for consumers.”

July 29, 2010 — 17 comments — Columns

Why Parma Ham May Stand in the Way of ACTA and CETA

Canada is currently negotiating two major international trade agreements and my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that while it may seem hard to believe, their successful completion may ultimately depend on the level of protection provided to Parma ham. The Canada – European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) are both facing increasing opposition based on European demands to expand protection for “geographical indications.”

Geographical indications (GI) are signs used on goods – frequently food, wine, or spirits – that have a specific geographical origin and are said to possess qualities, reputation or characteristics that are essentially attributable to that place of origin. Given the quality associated with the product, proponents of GI protection argue that it is needed to avoid consumer confusion as well as to protect legitimate producers.

July 20, 2010 — 8 comments — Columns

Federal Court Rules Internet Providers Not Broadcasters

Last year, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission released its new media decision, which addressed the prospect of increased CRTC regulation of Internet activities. After days of hearings and thousands of pages of submissions, the Commission side-stepped the pressure to "do something," maintaining a hands-off approach and punting the most contentious issue – the prospect of a new levy on Internet providers to fund Canadian content – to the courts.

The Internet levy proposal received strong support from several Canadian creator groups, who argued that given the video content streamed online, ISPs should be viewed as broadcasters within the Broadcasting Act. By treating ISPs as the equivalent of conventional broadcasters, they would be required to contribute to the Act’s policy objectives, which include promotion and support for Canadian content. The ISPs unsurprisingly opposed the proposal, maintaining that they are mere conduits in the transmission of video content. They argued the levy proposal was illegal since they are regulated under the Telecommunications Act as telecom companies, not broadcasters.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes the two sides faced off at the Federal Court of Appeal earlier this year and last week a unanimous court sided with the ISPs, ruling that providing access to broadcasting is not the same as broadcasting. It concluded that so long as ISPs maintain a content-neutral approach, they fall outside of the Broadcasting Act and should not be expected to play a role in promoting the policies found in the legislation.

July 12, 2010 — 11 comments — Columns

Geo-Blocking Sites a Business Rather Than Legal Issue

The Internet was once viewed as a “borderless” world that had little regard for the physical location of users. That sentiment likely seems outdated today to many Canadian Internet users who have grown accustomed to clicking on links for audio or video services only to be advised that the content, site or service is not available in their area.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that “geo-blocking” has become standard practice among broadcasters, sports leagues, and music services that use technologies to identify the likely location of an Internet user in real-time and block the content in some circumstances. From World Cup broadcasts to Hulu.com (a popular U.S. video site) to Spotify (a European music service), Canadians often find themselves unable to access content and unsure who is to blame.

While some have misleadingly suggested that outdated laws are the reason behind the blocking, the reality is that geo-blocking is invariably a business issue, not a legal one. Indeed, geo-blocking occurs worldwide – U.S. residents are similarly unable to use Spotify and are blocked from accessing the CBC’s streaming coverage of the World Cup. Rather than a reaction to older laws, the geo-blocking approach is actually an attempt to preserve an older business model, namely content licencing on a country-by-country or market-by-market approach [note that I say older, not outdated – territorial licencing obviously makes financial sense in some situations].

July 8, 2010 — 25 comments — Columns

Developing Country Opposition to ACTA Mounts

Just as the G8-G20 meetings conclude in Muskoka and Toronto, another round of negotiations on the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement resumes in Switzerland today. In the aftermath of the last round of discussions in New Zealand, a draft version of the ACTA text was publicly released, temporarily quieting criticism about the lack of transparency associated with an agreement that currently touches on all forms of intellectual property, including patents, trademark, and copyright.

While the transparency concerns are no longer in the spotlight, my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that mounting opposition to the agreement from the developing world, particularly powerhouse economies such as India, China, and Brazil, is attracting considerable attention. The public opposition from those countries – India has threatened to establish a coalition of countries against the treaty – dramatically raise the political stakes and place Canada between a proverbial rock and hard place, given its close ties to the U.S. and ambition to increase economic ties with India and China.

June 29, 2010 — 9 comments — Columns