We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 53

Supreme Court of Canada to rule on whether ISPs can be regulated under the Broadcasting Act
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • June 28 2011

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) has granted leave to appeal a Federal Court of Appeal judgment dated 7 July 2010, which held that internet service providers (ISPs) do not carry on a "broadcasting undertaking" as defined in the federal Broadcasting Act


Federal Court of Appeal rules that CRTC has authority to permit broadcasters to charge cable companies a fee for local television signals
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • May 4 2011

The Federal Court of Appeal of Canada has ruled that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is permitted to establish a so-called "Value for Signal" (VFS) regime whereby broadcasters may negotiate a fee with cable and satellite companies for the right to carry local signals (i.e., local stations) in their packaged television offerings


US government crackdown targets Canadian online gaming company
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada, USA
  • May 3 2012

On 28 February 2012, prosecutors in Maryland charged four Canadian founders of an online gaming website (the Company) with running an illegal sports gambling business and conspiring to commit money laundering


Canadian appeals court rules internet service providers are not broadcasters
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • September 6 2010

The Federal Court of Appeal (Court) has confirmed that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are not broadcasters


CRTC rules on signal compensation regime for Canadian broadcasters
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • May 10 2010

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has issued a decision adopting in principle a new signal compensation regime in which private local Canadian broadcasters may elect to enter into negotiations with Canadian distributors to establish compensation for over-the-air signals


Telecommunications firms litigate internet speed advertising claims
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • September 30 2009

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has denied a request for an injunction by Bell Canada, the largest Canadian internet service provider, but has made important comments on the merits of an underlying action relating to comparative advertising of internet speed claims


Global action taken against global Microsoft Imposter telemarketing scam
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Australia, Canada, Global, USA
  • September 28 2012

Joint action between the ACMA, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Canadian Radio television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has led to court orders being obtained against US-based and India-based parties involved in the global 'Microsoft Imposter' phone scam


Supreme Court holds that ISPs are not broadcasters
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • April 5 2012

On 16 January 2012, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that retail internet service providers (ISPs) are not subject to the federal Broadcasting Act as a result of providing consumers with access to broadcasting over the internet


Canada revises community television policy
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • November 9 2010

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) issued an updated policy requiring cable undertakings to ensure that at least half of the programming on their community access channels is created by community members, meaning that the original idea for a program must come from members of the community, who must also be involved in some aspect of the production, whether in front or behind the camera


Canadian Competition Authority imposes first C$10 million civil penalty for misleading advertising
  • Baker & McKenzie
  • Canada
  • September 6 2011

On 28 June 2011, the Canadian Competition Bureau (CCB) registered a consent agreement with the Canadian Competition Tribunal (CCT) in which one of Canada's largest communications company agreed to pay a civil administrative monetary penalty of C$10 million for misleading advertising in connection with its internet, home phone, wireless and television services