CCTA and CAIP applaud rare guidance on C-15 rule interpretation by minister

The Canadian Cable Television Association (CCTA) is applauding rare guidance from the justice minister on how new draft legislation on Internet child pornography should be interpreted. Bill C-15 puts new powers in the hands of government to combat child porn, but both the CCTA and Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) say some provisions relating to ISPs are inappropriate, putting responsibility for take-down of offending material and liability for access in their hands. Although proposed amendments to the bill that would have eliminated those concerns were voted down by a Liberal majority on the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights on October 4, CCTA and CAIP officials are optimistic on-record comments by Justice minister Anne McLellan mean ISPs won’t be targeted by the new law. In her appearance before the committee on October 2, McLellan told members, "I…want to clarify that the bill does not create additional obligations for Internet service providers, or ISPs, as they are known. As was the case for the other child pornography offences, ISPs that have neither knowledge nor control over the child pornography transmitted via, or stored on, their servers will not be liable for transmitting or making available. The bill does not require them to monitor the material going through their servers. "Doing so would raise significant privacy issues in relation to Internet users and place an excessive burden on ISPs. I understand they are already co-operating with enforcement authorities and I expect them to continue to do so. And in fact I understand they are hard at work on codes of conduct to regulate, through self-regulation, how they operate. It is important in this area to provide them with the opportunity to self-regulate before we, as legislators, would contemplate anything further." Responding to McLellan’s comments, CCTA president/CEO Janet Yale says the minister has the cable industry’s full support. "The industry is very pleased that the minister clarified the intent of the legislation vis-à-vis ISPs when she appeared before the committee," Yale told CNM. "Having it on record that Parliament did not intend to create new obligations for ISPs or require them to monitor material going through their servers is important. It clarifies the scope of ISP liability and will be helpful in interpreting the law in the future." Still, some industry players are disappointed that amendments tabled on behalf of the CCTA and CAIP by PC member Peter MacKay were defeated. The three amendments would have removed liability from ISPs’ hands by eliminating references to 100 per cent removal of child porn from computer and server storage systems, to identify the poster of pornographic material in 100 per cent of cases, and to clarify that ISPs which simply provide telecom services can’t be held liable for material passing through their equipment. "The minister…said some very positive things about the industry and assured committee members that the bill was not intended to target ISPs," CAIP president Jay Thomson told CNM. "This latter point was echoed by Justice officials during clause by clause . While these comments are most welcome, we still believe it is important to have certainty in the legislation." Though it’s unlikely the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee will amend the bill when it reaches the Upper House, Thomson says his organization will continue to press for change. "We’ll now take our concerns to the Senate as that’s the next forum for the bill to be considered…," he says. "We understand that there may be pressure to move this bill through quickly given that it has all-party support in the House, and is seen as a good-news bill. …However, our concern remains that all the best intentions could be overruled by an over-zealous judge or prosecutor who’s looking for an easy target, just as SOCAN has attempted to do with its Tariff 22, i.e. go after ISPs simply for convenience, not because it makes any legal sense. We’re not yet prepared to accept that the clarity we seek won’t become part of the final bill. We think our case is important and serious enough that it should be accepted by the Senate." Jill-Anne Joseph, clerk of the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee says she hasn’t begun scheduling witnesses for the Senate’s examination of the bill. She says the Red Chamber is still dealing with bills C-7 and C-24, and anticipates having to deal before the end of the year with the new anti-terrorism legislation introduced on October 15. "I would not think that Bill C-15 will come to us anytime this year," she says. "I would think that we might get it early next year and deal with it then."

CCTA and CAIP applaud rare guidance on C-15 rule interpretation by minister

News | 10/18/2001 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us