04_Reference re Broadcasting Act_2012

Reference re Broadcasting Act

Case Citation

  • Court: Supreme Court of Canada

  • Citation: Reference re Broadcasting Act, 2012 SCC 4

  • Date: February 9, 2012

  • Docket: 33884

Involved Parties

  • Appellants:

    • Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists

    • Canadian Media Production Association

    • Directors Guild of Canada

    • Writers Guild of Canada

  • Respondents:

    • Bell Aliant Regional Communications, LP

    • Bell Canada

    • Cogeco Cable Inc.

    • MTS Allstream Inc.

    • Rogers Communications Inc.

    • TELUS Communications Company

    • Videotron Ltd.

    • Shaw Communications Inc.

  • Intervenor: Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)

Court Composition

  • Justices Present: McLachlin C.J., LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis JJ.

Background

  • Legislation: Broadcasting Act, S.C. 1991, c. 11

  • CRTC Policies:

    • Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-329

    • Broadcasting Order CRTC 2009-452

  • Legal Context: Application referred to Federal Court of Appeal per Federal Courts Act

Key Issues

Legal Question

  • Whether Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are considered "broadcasting undertakings" as defined by the Broadcasting Act when providing access to broadcasting content over the internet.

Court Decision

Ruling Summary

  • Decision: ISPs do not qualify as "broadcasting undertakings" when providing internet access to end-users for broadcasting content.

  • Reasoning:

    • ISPs simply facilitate transmission rather than controlling or originating content.

    • The Broadcasting Act emphasizes content control and does not encompass entities that solely transmit data.

    • ISPs lack involvement in selection, origination, or packaging of broadcast content.

Relevant Legal Precedents Cited

  • Electric Despatch Co. of Toronto v. Bell Telephone Co. of Canada (1891): Discussed limitations of transmission entities.

  • Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v. Canadian Assn. of Internet Providers (2004): Established that ISPs merely serve as conduits for information.

  • Capital Cities Communications Inc. v. Canadian Radio-Television Commission (1978): Emphasized that control over content differentiates broadcasting entities from simple transmission services.

Implications of the Ruling

  • Reinforces the distinction between broadcasters and service providers in regulatory terms.

  • Clarifies the scope and intent of the Broadcasting Act regarding ISP operations.

  • Potential impact on regulatory frameworks and future policy debates surrounding internet broadcasting and content delivery.

Conclusion

  • The appeal was dismissed with costs.

  • Solicitors for the parties involved have been noted.