Telecoms’ site-blocking court request ‘draconian,’ TekSavvy argues

OTTAWA — Lawyers representing BCE Inc., Quebecor Inc.’s Groupe TVA, and Rogers Communications Inc. asked a Federal Court judge this morning for a court order that would force a number of internet service providers to block what they say are two “pirate” sites, GoldTV.ca and GoldTV.biz. The court order would, lawyers for the telecom companies said, set a precedent in forcing third-party ISPs to block access to particular sites, send a strong signal to internet pirates and have a deterrent effect. The telecom and media companies, which are suing GoldTV, told Federal Court Justice Patrick Gleeson that the sites receive almost 250,000 visitors a month, where users can subscribe to an IPTV service that the companies say “provides unauthorized access to hundreds (if not thousands) of live television channels,” including content produced by Canadian rights-holders. The sites offer subscriptions for either a $15 monthly fee or a $150 yearly fee. Despite investigations conducted by the companies, it remains unknown who operates the two sites, the court heard. In August a different Federal Court judge granted an interim injunction to shut down the two sites. Both appeared to be offline as of late afternoon Wednesday. Responding in court to today’s request, TekSavvy Solutions Inc. lawyer Colin Baxter told the judge that, while TekSavvy does not support internet piracy, the company opposes the request for site-blocking. The motion is, Baxter told the court, “a draconian remedy that undercuts the legislative mandate of net neutrality.” “This goes against the very bedrock principles of the regulatory regime, the telecommunications regime in Canada as it's set forth in a number of pieces of legislation,” he said, before citing several occasions where telecom representatives have asked for site-blocking before the CRTC and Parliament. In their request for a site-blocking order, the telecom companies are also seeking the authority to amend the order without returning to court, saying that to stay one step ahead of internet piracy, the order needed to be flexible. This request, argued Baxter for TekSavvy, is “part of a long and complex war that’s being fought by the incumbents on many fronts,” and that would “inevitably result in collateral damage to lawful internet use.” Baxter said that in TekSavvy’s eventual submission to the court, the company would argue that the site-blocking order, with room for changes at the behest of telecom companies, would “turn into a rolling list, updated every two weeks, solely to ensure the plaintiffs’ profits.” Baxter also argued that a precedential site-blocking order would effectively undermine the notice-and-notice regime, established in 2015 to deal with internet copyright infringement. Last year, a coalition of telecom companies and broadcasters, called FairPlay, came together to ask the CRTC to institute a site-blocking system, a request the CRTC eventually decided it had no jurisdiction to do. Last fall, the fight over site-blocking moved to Parliament Hill, where the telecom companies asked lawmakers to strengthen anti-piracy measures in the Copyright Act. The two-day Federal Court hearing continues tomorrow. — With reporting by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca and editing by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca

Telecoms’ site-blocking court request ‘draconian,’ TekSavvy argues

Broadcast | September 11, 2019

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