CRTC could still force U.S. streamers to pay up, even if they lose court case: industry reps, lawyers

Ottawa’s efforts to regulate U.S streaming companies under the Online Streaming Act is likely to move forward, regardless of the result of an ongoing court battle, according to industry players and legal experts. The Canadian cultural community still anxiously awaits the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision over a CRTC order that would require all streamers with annual Canadian revenues exceeding $25 million to allocate five per cent of the total to cultural and broadcasting organizations that create domestic news and entertainment. The order, issued as part of the regulator’s implementation of Bill C-11, which modernized the country’s broadcasting framework, has been challenged in court by several U.S. tech giants, including Amazon.com Inc., Netflix Inc., and Spotify AB, who have argued, among other things, that the CRTC’s order is not jurisdictionally valid. However, rumours have since percolated that, depending on the court’s ruling, the CRTC may turn to other procedural tools to ensure the implementation of a contribution requirement for streamers. In addition to its authority to pass orders, the CRTC’s regulatory toolbox also includes the longstanding ability to bring forward regulations, which are less susceptible to procedural challenges in court. As such, various policy experts have told The Wire Report that the court challenge’s outcome may be inconsequential, given the CRTC has multiple avenues of imposing the base contribution threshold. According to industry players, it’s likely a question of how, as opposed to whether, streamers will be forced to pay — effectively leaving the regulator in a ‘can’t-lose’ situation. “Suppose the streamers win on a procedural point, if I were the government, I’d just ‘Gazette’ it,” said Howard Law, author of the blog mediapolicy.ca, referencing the federal government’s practice of publishing new regulations in the Canada Gazette. “Barring trade intervention, is going to have to happen.” The CRTC’s order-making powers are relatively new, as they were added in the Online Streaming Act, which passed through Parliament in 2023. The streamers have appealed the order on a procedural basis, along with more substance-based elements of the policy, some of which force audiovisual companies to fund the development of Canadian news. According to Law, the CRTC has a “huge ambit” when it comes to making companies support domestic news production, but the procedural argument could have more merit. “I don’t think the streamers can get anywhere with these arguments,” he told The Wire Report. “ maybe the CRTC should have to ‘Gazette’ it,” as opposed to issuing an order. Several legal experts also acknowledged the potential for the CRTC to move forward with regulations that, in effect, enforce the same policy outlined in the original order. Thomas Streeter, a media law professor at the University of Western Ontario, said that exact outcome “seems likely,” if the order is struck down. Meanwhile, Marina Pavlovic, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, said the process will “depend on the merits of the FCA (Federal Court of Appeal) judgement and the basis for striking down the CRTC decision.” Pavlovic noted that any decision by the CRTC would likely still require another public consultation, as is the regulator’s common practice. “If the FCA finds that the CRTC had jurisdiction but there are other issues with the Policy, the CRTC may launch a new proceeding,” Pavlovic wrote The Wire Report in an email. “It is also very likely that the FCA decision may first be appealed to the SCC (Supreme Court of Canada).” One lawyer involved in the ongoing court case noted the CRTC’s protocol rules out the possibility of immediate regulations following the ruling’s release, explaining that the commission “could not just simply throw out another regulation they would have to build a public record.” “So, you’re really almost starting again,” said the lawyer, who asked to remain anonymous because of their involvement in the judicial proceedings. “And, if were done arbitrarily, you can just imagine that there would be appeals.” The CRTC did not immediately respond to questions about whether it would consider introducing regulations as a contingency plan for the court’s decision. However, the potential inevitability of streamers facing a contribution requirement may give an indication as to why certain companies have already started flowing money to eligible funding recipients, including news-based funds, despite the court awarding a stay on all payments. One streaming industry representative said they wouldn’t be surprised if the CRTC proceeded with additional regulations because “they would have the ability to do such a thing.” But, they continued, it’s indicative of the refusal to re-consider its policy implementation, despite pushback from companies, certain stakeholders and, potentially, the courts. “It feels like this has been the trend from day one, which is to not follow process,” said the representative, who asked not to be named in order to speak freely. “From our perspective, the CRTC is just barrelling ahead regardless of the facts of the situation.” “Their approach has been unhelpful.” The industry source added that a loss in court should give the CRTC “pause for reelection," especially considering the ongoing geopolitical situation. U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has repeatedly identified the Online Streaming Act as a primary trade irritant ahead of the upcoming review of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). Earlier this month, Republican congressman Lloyd Smucker introduced a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that, if passed, would launch an investigation into the Canadian law to determine if it's discriminatory against U.S.-based companies. Canadian Identity Minister Marc Miller (Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Sœurs, Que.) has previously suggested the legislation may be part of bilateral trade discussions with the White House — which, according to the industry rep, would be hurt by any new CRTC regulations. “The more that piles on more, at least from our perspective, bad news, it just makes the situation worse and creates more tension in current U.S.-Canada relations,” they said. “This is clearly one of the key things that the U.S. wants to talk about, so it’s just a difficult sequencing right now.” dlegree@thewirereport.ca

CRTC could still force U.S. streamers to pay up, even if they lose court case: industry reps, lawyers

Broadcast |
By Davis Legree
|March 31, 2026

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

CRTC could still force U.S. streamers to pay up, even if they lose court case: industry reps, lawyers

Broadcast | By Davis Legree |March 31, 2026

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Q&A: B.C. public safety minister talks lawful access, online harms following Tumbler Ridge tragedy

Corus wins court approval of recapitalization transaction

Industry committee calls for sovereign data networks and Arctic investment to bolster national defence

Related Stories

Which telecom and broadcasting lobbyists made The Hill Times’s Top 100 list?

Radio-Canada postpones contract with Prime Video, winning praise from Bloc

Audience fragmentation, technological change challenge Western Association of Broadcasters

Increased accessibility a long-term goal for Disability Screen Office

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Broadcast |
By Davis Legree
|March 31, 2026