The Canadian pirate site blocking proposal threatens net neutrality, the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics warns. In a report that's supported across the political spectrum, the committee urges the Government to use its authority to intervene, if required.

Earlier this year several of the largest telcos in Canada teamed up with copyright holders to present their plan to tackle online piracy.

United in the Fairplay Canada coalition, Bell, Rogers, and others urged telecoms regulator CRTC to institute a national website blocking program.

The blocklist should be maintained by a yet to be established non-profit organization called the “Independent Piracy Review Agency” (IPRA) and both IPRA and the CRTC would be overseen by the Federal Court of Appeal, the organizations propose.

Thus far the response to the plan has been mixed. Several large media companies are in favor of blockades, arguing that it’s one of the few options to stop piracy. However, others fear that it will lead to overblocking and other problems.

Last week, the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics joined the opposition. In a detailed report on the protection of net neutrality in Canada, it signaled the blocking proposal as a serious concern.

The House of Commons committee, which advises Parliament on a variety of matters, notes that the Fairplay coalition hasn’t sufficiently explained why the current process doesn’t work, nor has it supplied sufficient evidence to justify the new measures.

“[T]he Committee is of the view that the proposal could impede the application of net neutrality in Canada, and that in their testimony, the ISPs did not present sufficient explanation as to why the existing process is inadequate or sufficient justification to support to application,” the report reads.

At the same time, the lack of judicial oversight is seen as a problem.

“The Committee also remains skeptical about the absence of judicial oversight in the Fair Play proposal and is of the view that maintaining such oversight is critical,” it adds.

What is clear, however, is that the proposal could impede the application of net neutrality in Canada. As such, the House of Commons committee recommends that the Government asks the CRTC to reconsider its decision, if it decides in favor of the blocking plan.

“That, in the event that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission supports FairPlay Canada’s application, the federal government consider using the authority provided under section 12 of the Telecommunications Act to ask the CRTC to reconsider its decision,” the recommendation reads.

Recommendation

https://torrentfreak.com/images/committeereco.png

The net neutrality angle has been brought up by several parties in the past, ranging from legal experts, through copyright holders, to the public at large. While many see it as a threat, those in favor of website blocking say it’s a non-issue.

Even Internet providers themselves are divided on the topic. Where Shaw sees no net neutrality concerns, TekSavvy has argued the opposite.

The House of Commons committee report clearly sides with the opponents and with backing from all political parties, it sends a strong message. This is music to the ears of law professor Micheal Geist, one of the most vocal critics of the Fairplay proposal.

“With all parties joining in a recommendation against the site blocking plan, the report represents a strong signal that the FairPlay coalition plan led by Bell does not have political support given that it raises freedom of expression, due process, and net neutrality concerns,” Geist notes.

—

A copy of the report of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is available here (pdf).

Source: Torrentfreak.com

I think this topic (piracy) as a whole will always be one of controversy. First what is piracy? My interpretation of piracy would be... copying or distributing copyrighted works for profit. I do not believe that the loss of profit comes into my view of piracy. These companies are all trying to achieve one thing... Stopping or minimizing profit loss, they're way of doing this is quoting piracy laws which in themselves, to a degree not only make no sense but contradict fair use.

Someone who owns a legitimate copy of something whether it's a book, movie, music cd etc. should be allowed to do as they wish with that item as long as they are not doing so for financial gain.

I think what adds to the problem is people who pirate 90% of there digital collection. It is nice to get things for free, however it does have a negative roll-on affect. Whether it is a higher cost to those who pay (uploaders) or whether it is companies banning together "every action has an equal and opposite reaction".

Though I will say if the companies were not so greedy then maybe people would start buying more and Downloading less (maybe not). I know I download more stuff that is over priced then a movie that is $5-$10. The other main reason is a movie or show that is not yet available in my own region but available in others.
If the companies start asking the questions maybe they would find a solution that isn't pulling people into court. Just my two cents for the two cents it's worth :-)