Streamers challenge CRTC decision to publicly disclose financial information

Major international streaming companies are asking the Federal Court of Appeal to review the CRTC’s decision to publicly disclose financial information that they argue is confidential and could lead to competitive harm. The Canadian arm of the Motion Picture Association (MPA-Canada), representing studios from companies including Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Amazon, Sony, Universal, and Warner Bros. Discovery Inc., filed an application for judicial review and a motion for leave to appeal with the court on Thursday, Dec. 18 and obtained by The Wire Report. The group is challenging a specific part of the updates made to the CRTC’s definition of Canadian content (CanCon) last month, in which the regulator lays out its intent to publish information on the gross Canadian revenues, Canadian programming expenditures (CPE), and “other contributions” from both online streamers and traditional broadcasters. They contend that this information is commercially sensitive and exposes them to a “serious risk of competitive and other harm.” In its November decision, the CRTC justified its finding by stating that, “it is unlikely that any harm resulting from disclosure of that data would outweigh the public interest, given the relatively large size of the online undertakings whose information is intended to be made public and their associated large impact on the Canadian broadcasting system.” Such disclosure “fosters transparency” and accountability in the broadcasting sector, the CRTC argued, adding that it “levels the playing field” between online and traditional undertakings. MPA-Canada alleges the CRTC misinterpreted new confidentiality rules that were added to the Broadcasting Act with the passing of the Online Streaming Act. According to the act, the new rules allow anyone submitting information to the CRTC to designate it as confidential if it is a trade secret; financial, commercial, scientific or technical information that is confidential and “consistently” treated as such; or if disclosure could “reasonably” result in material financial loss or gain, prejudice their competitive position, or affect contractual negotiations. “The CRTC did not contemplate any further consideration on a case-by-case basis as financial data, and confidentiality designations are filed in the future,” the streamers allege, arguing that the commission pre-judged the issue before they could exercise their statutory rights. “ made this determination even before receiving any broadcasting undertakings’ 2025-2026 financial data,” the group notes. MPA-Canada also argues that the CRTC misinterpreted the scope of the phrase “disclosure is in the public interest,” found in the same section of the Broadcasting Act. By relying solely on a general interest in transparency, the CRTC overwrote the confidentiality protections mandated in the act, the streamers maintain. This is not the first time that concerns around the disclosure of financial information have been raised by the streamers. When the CRTC began implementing the first regulations under the Online Streaming Act, specifically the base contribution requirement, online streaming companies took issue with being forced to make contributions to funds managed by potential competitors, such as the Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ (CAB) local news fund. MPA-Canada said it was worried that broadcasters would be able to deduce their financial information based on their contribution amounts. Streamers called on the CRTC to implement a system that would ensure this information remains confidential. The commission later decided, "given the importance of confidentiality," that it would allow broadcasters to file their base contribution amounts with a third-party administrator or require agreements with recipient funds to ensure specific financial information remains confidential. MPA-Canada points to that decision as an example of the CRTC upholding the confidentiality rules of the Broadcasting Act, alleging that it runs contrary to what the CRTC is doing in this case. This latest decision from the CRTC "provides no explanation for why the CRTC’s interpretation of the changed between 2024 and 2025," the group argues. The CRTC did not respond to The Wire Report's request for comment by the time of publication. phalentm@thewirereport.ca

Streamers challenge CRTC decision to publicly disclose financial information

Broadcast |
By Phalen Tynes-MacDonald
|December 18, 2025

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

Streamers challenge CRTC decision to publicly disclose financial information

Broadcast | By Phalen Tynes-MacDonald |December 18, 2025

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Ericsson seeks to overturn certification of Steelworkers union to represent workers

CRTC to impose described video, audio requirements on streamers

Feds pour $10.9 million into Alberta radio station

Related Stories

Ericsson seeks to overturn certification of Steelworkers union to represent workers

Rogers appeals Competition Tribunal’s exclusion of details about commissioner’s alleged inaction in data plan dispute

Akash Broadcasting sues over CRTC denial of Calgary AM station

Cogeco challenges CRTC decision on Quebecor’s Montreal radio deal in Federal Court of Appeal

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Broadcast |
By Phalen Tynes-MacDonald
|December 18, 2025