The recent decision by Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) on satellite radio has received mixed reviews. Although criticized as being a reversal in Canadian broadcasting policy, it is also being praised as striking a difficult compromise. The CRTC decision lays out a framework for subscription satellite and terrestrial radio in response to licence applications by Sirius Canada Inc and Canadian Satellite Radio Inc, both based in the US, and Canadian-based CHUM Limited. The decision requires a licence holder to provide a minimum of eight Canadian pay radio channels, and at least one Canadian channel for every nine foreign channels. There are minimum Canadian content requirements for the Canadian channels and the US-based companies are required to donate 5% of their gross annual revenues to initiatives for the development of Canadian talent. The system will be delivered using US satellite services. The Friends of Canadian Broadcasting has criticized the decision as being contrary to the Broadcasting Act and Parliament's intention in the enactment of the legislation. Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, believes that the CRTC made the best of a bad situation. The long-existing CRTC policy on Canadian content was designed to increase consumption of Canadian programming, which furthers the interests of artists and preserves Canadian culture in the face of easily accessible, mass-produced American culture. However, if the CRTC does not present a compromise acceptable to the American broadcasters, they will continue to rely on grey market distribution of their services, without regard to any Canadian content requirements. For the relevant CRTC news release, visit: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/NEWS/RELEASES/2005/r050616.htm For the full commentary by Prof Geist, see: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/resc/html_bkup/june202005.html For the statement of the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, visit: http://www.friends.ca/News/news06160501.asp Summary by: Nyall Engfield

E-TIPS® ISSUE

05 07 06

Disclaimer: This Newsletter is intended to provide readers with general information on legal developments in the areas of e-commerce, information technology and intellectual property. It is not intended to be a complete statement of the law, nor is it intended to provide legal advice. No person should act or rely upon the information contained in this newsletter without seeking legal advice.

E-TIPS is a registered trade-mark of Deeth Williams Wall LLP.