Telecom Procedural Letter addressed to Mr. John Lawford (Public Interest Advocacy Centre)
Ottawa, 12 June 2018
Our reference: 8663-A182-201800467
Mr. John Lawford
Executive Director and General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Re: Application to disable on-line access to piracy websites – Procedural Request
On 29 January 2018, Asian Television Network International Limited filed an application on behalf of itself and a number of other persons (collectively, FairPlay Coalition) seeking the establishment of a regime that would serve to identify websites and services that are “blatantly, overwhelmingly, or structurally engaged” in copyright piracy and result in a requirement on Internet Service Providers to block access to such identified sites and services.
On 16 May 2018, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) filed a letter pertaining to the above-referenced application. In this letter, PIAC argued that the FairPlay Coalition had adduced significant new evidence in its reply comments which new evidence could not be said to be limited to rebutting new allegations raised by intervenors.
PIAC submitted that this new evidence was therefore out of process and requested that the Commission strike the new evidence or, in the alternative, that all intervenors be provided with a right to reply to this new evidence and a right to adduce new evidence themselves. PIAC requested a 14 August 2018 deadline for the filing of such reply comments and supporting evidence.
Responses to PIAC’s procedural request were received from the Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic, the Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. and the Forum for Research and Policy in Communications, which supported the request, and from the FairPlay Coalition, which opposed the request to strike the impugned materials from the record but did express an openness to providing parties with further process in order to comment on the materials.
In a procedural letter dated 15 February 2018, it was stated that the Commission would determine at a later time whether further process associated with the proceeding initiated by the above-referenced application is warranted and, if so, in what form. Consistent with this pronouncement, the Commission will determine at a latter point the procedural approach that should be adopted with respect to the evidence referenced by PIAC.
Original signed by
Senior Legal Counsel
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Cc: Asian Television Network International Limited, email@example.com
Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic, firstname.lastname@example.org
Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc., email@example.com
Forum for Research and Policy in Communications, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date modified: