Cross-industry coalition calls for website-blocking

A broad coalition made up of Canada’s largest telecoms and broadcasters, as well as groups representing content creators, is asking the CRTC to put in place a system to block pirated content. The FairPlay Canada coalition represents 25 organizations and companies, including BCE Inc., Quebecor Inc., Rogers Communications Inc., Corus Entertainment Inc., DHX Media Ltd., CBC/Radio-Canada, and groups including the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA), the Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA) and the Directors Guild of Canada (DGC). The coalition said in its application to the CRTC, a copy of which is posted on its website, that it wants the regulator to create an “independent agency to identify websites and services that are blatantly, overwhelmingly, or structurally engaged in piracy. Following due process and subject to judicial oversight, would ultimately be required to disable access to the identified piracy sites and services.” While the coalition represents unusual consensus among organizations that represent different segments of the industry and often disagree, their proposal was met with opposition from net neutrality advocates Tuesday. The application, dated Jan. 28, argued that piracy is a growing threat to Canada’s creative sector, broadcasters and legal distributors. “Investing in programming is already risky, and becomes increasingly unviable if even the rare hit cannot be effectively monetized because it is pirated online. As a result, piracy undermines the creation of cultural content and threatens the viability of Canada’s cultural sector and therefore the expression of uniquely Canadian perspectives and identities,” the application argued. Piracy also hurts TV providers and over-the-top (OTT) streaming services, it said. “The experience of the relevant members of the coalition with their own customers suggests that households that engage with piracy sites and services (such as the use of illegal set-top-boxes) are many times more likely to cancel legal distribution services or not sign up for them in the first place. This results in the loss of potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for distributors that would otherwise support investment in modern telecommunications infrastructure in Canada, in the Canadian economy, and in the Canadian creative sector.” The application pointed to other countries, noting that many have implemented rules to require ISPs to block access to sites with pirated content, and have seen reductions in visits to those sites and an increase in traffic to legitimate sites. Site-blocking has increasingly become a topic of discussion ever since Bell proposed a system similar to that suggested by the coalition in front of a Parliamentary committee last year. Shaw Communications Inc. then used the CRTC’s Creative Canada consultation to back the idea of website-blocking as a piracy-fighting strategy. Such an approach wouldn’t violate net neutrality principles, because the regulator would be the one to determine which sites are blocked, not the ISPs, the coalition’s application said. “Net neutrality does not prevent the legal and regulatory systems from taking steps to constrain the dissemination of unlawful content online,” it argued. However, Internet advocacy group OpenMedia said the proposal “would essentially create an official Internet censorship committee within the federal government, and open the door for overreaching censorship in Canada.” It will also “lead to legitimate content and speech being censored online violating our right to free expression and the principles of net neutrality,” the group's executive director Laura Tribe said in the release. Instead, the way to fight piracy is with affordable, user-friendly services, she added, citing the examples of Netflix Inc. and Spotify AB. Academic Ben Klass, who initially raised the complaint that would eventually lead to the CRTC’s zero-rating decision, also said in an email Tuesday afternoon that “instead of spending their energy on creative but ultimately misguided requests for protection — i.e. the construction of a government censorship agency — companies concerned about piracy should be working to provide their services in innovative ways that are accessible, affordable, and user-friendly.” If they were to follow the example of the music industry and introduce such products, “I suspect that problems associated with piracy recede in overall importance,” Klass argued. He said the system proposed by the companies “would be inefficient, disproportionate to its goals, and unlikely to be effective.” Under the regime proposed by the coalition, a new organization called the Independent Piracy Review Agency (IPRA) would consider applications to add a site to the list of blocked sites. “It would review evidence submitted by the applicant, the websites, ISPs, and other interested parties, including in an oral hearing if appropriate, and would make recommendations to the Commission. The Commission would consider the evidence and these recommendations and, if approved, would require and authorize ISPs to disable access to these piracy sites,” the coalition suggested. Establishing the IPRA would create “a significantly more timely and efficient process for considering applications than would be possible for the Commission. The efficiency of the process is crucial, given the pace at which piracy can evolve online,” the application noted. It said that its suggested system would incorporate checks and balances, including giving notice, giving the website, the ISP, and other parties an opportunity to review applications and evidence and participate in a hearing before the IPRA, and having the CRTC review all IPRA decisions in a “transparent” process. The IPRA would “only recommend adding a website to the list of piracy sites if the evidence presented establishes that it is blatantly, overwhelmingly, or structurally engaged in piracy,” the application said. It added there is also the “potential for further review of all Commission decisions through the established review and vary procedure; and oversight of the entire system by the Federal Court of Appeal, including potential appeals on questions of law or jurisdiction including constitutional questions, and the right to seek judicial review of the process and merits of the decision.” — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and reporting and editing by Ahmad Hathout at atahathout@thewirereport.ca

Cross-industry coalition calls for website-blocking

Broadcast | January 29, 2018

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Cross-industry coalition calls for website-blocking

Broadcast | January 29, 2018

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Telecom industry players look to Senate for greater copper theft prevention

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us