How can the government’s attitude and approach to internet issues best be described?
The Canadian government recognises that Canada is a small country
in a global economy and it pursues a general policy to ensure that
Canada is ‘connected’. To that end, the government recognises that
broadband internet access is essential infrastructure in the country
and tax dollars are being spent to ensure that the urban/rural divide
in access is bridged. Although controversial, Canada is also attempting
to revise the Copyright Act in part to address internet related
concerns such as downloading of copyright material.
Which regulatory bodies are responsible for the regulation of
e‑commerce and internet access tariffs and charges?
Regulation is generally light in Canada, with no centralised oversight.
The Electronic Commerce Branch of Industry Canada takes primary
responsibility for policy implementation in the areas of privacy, security,
authentication and various online threats such as identity theft.
The branch also works with Statistics Canada to monitor usage of
information and communications technologies. There are no tariffs
and charges in Canada imposed by any level of government.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
(the CRTC), which has regulatory responsibility for the Telecommunications
Act and the Broadcasting Act, has pronounced on
more than one occasion that it will not regulate the internet. However,
the trend towards viewing content that would otherwise be subject to
CRTC oversight under the Broadcasting Act may be revisited in the
future. The CRTC also periodically reviews such things as internet
service providers’ traffic management policies.
What tests or rules are applied by the courts to determine the
jurisdiction for internet‑related transactions (or disputes) in cases
where the defendant is resident or provides goods or services from
outside the jurisdiction?
Jurisdictional issues can be a challenge. Case law has generally supported
exclusive jurisdiction clauses unless there is a specific reason
to overrule them. The burden of establishing a specific reason rests
with the plaintiff and the threshold to be surpassed is beyond the
mere ‘balance of convenience’.
Otherwise, traditional common law principles have been used
by the courts to determine jurisdictional issues, which in an online
environment have proved more challenging to apply. For example,
factors such as ‘substantial connection’ test will look to the location
of the vendor, the intermediaries and the end-user.
Legislation, such as consumer protection legislation may also be
applied to determine whether certain aspects of online commerce are
in compliance. For example, depending upon the wording of the provincial
legislation, the courts may be willing to apply such laws both
where the consumer is located in the province, even if the vendor is not
or where the vendor is located in the province and the end-user is not.
Contracting on the internet
5 Is it possible to form and conclude contracts electronically? If so, how
are contracts formed on the internet? Explain whether ‘click wrap’
contracts are enforceable, and if so, what requirements need to be met.
Electronic contracts are enforceable in Canada. As outlined below,
almost all jurisdictions in Canada have passed specific legislation
conferring upon electronic transactions the same legal status as
paper-based contracts. All of the common law requirements for the
formation of a contract, including offer, acceptance and consideration
apply.
Click-wrap agreements have generally been found to be enforceable
in Canada. Notice plays a part in the determination of enforceability,
as does ‘accessibility’ of the terms of contract. The Supreme Court
of Canada upheld an arbitration clause in an online contract where the
contractual terms and conditions were only reached by hyperlink. In
its finding, the court stated that as long as the terms were ‘reasonably
accessible’ they were enforceable, and determined that a document
accessed only by hyperlink was sufficient to meet that test.
6 Are there any particular laws that govern contracting on the internet?
Do these distinguish between business‑to‑consumer and business‑tobusiness
contracts?
Each of the provinces and territories in Canada, with the exception
of the Northwest Territories, has adopted its own specific legislation
dealing with electronic commerce. Each of these acts deal primarily
with confirming the legal status of electronic-based records
or signatures (other than certain specific types of contracts, such as
wills) as well as records retention and confirming the formation and
operation of contracts by means of electronic record or activity in
electronic form (eg, clicking on some form of icon indicating acceptance
of an offer).
In addition, most provinces and territories also have their own
consumer protection laws and many have passed regulations in
respect of internet agreements or contracting. Such regulations deal
with required disclosure by a vendor with respect to itself and the
goods and contract in question, as well as providing for rules surrounding
the ability of a consumer to cancel an internet contract.
7 How does the law recognise or define digital or e‑signatures?
At both the federal and provincial level, legislation is in place to
specifically recognise electronic transactions, including the requirement
of execution. Generally speaking, Canadian law is enabling
and ‘technology-neutral’. Rather than requiring evidence of the reliability
of individual signatures or electronic signature certification,
the legislation presumes reliability when the system that produces or
stores the signature is reliable.
Under PIPEDA, the federal legislation, an electronic signature is
defined as a ‘signature that consists of one or more letters, characters,
numbers or other symbols in digital form incorporated in, attached to
or associated with an electronic document. PIPEDA further defined
‘secure electronic signature’ as an electronic signature that results
from the application of a technology or process that meets certain
tests prescribed by regulation, which relate to reliability attributes of
the technology to identify the individual. PIPEDA stipulates that if
there is a requirement under federal law for a signature, it is satisfied
by an electronic signature.
At the provincial level, most provinces and territories have
passed enabling legislation that confirms the efficacy of electronic
contracts, including the fulfilment of execution of that contract by
way of digital signature. In British Columbia, the Electronic Transactions
Act defines ‘electronic signature’ as ‘information in electronic
form that a person has created or adopted in order to sign a record
and that is in, attached to or associated with the record.’ There are
certain records that will not recognise such electronic signatures, such
as wills, powers of attorney or documents that create or transfer an
interest in land.
Record or data retention in Canada is prescribed by a number of
different statutes. PIPEDA also provides specifically for retention of
electronic contracts. If there is a requirement under a provision of
a federal law to retain a document, that requirement is satisfied by
the retention of an electronic document if the document is retained
for the period required by such federal law in the format in which
it was made, sent or received or in a format that does not change
the information contained in the document, and that the record is
capable of being read by anyone entitled to access, and finally if the
electronic document was sent or received, then information identifying
the origin of the document and destination of the document must
also be retained. Similar requirements are contained in provincial legislation.
For example, the British Columbia Electronic Transactions
Act contains provisions that require the retained record to be in the
format it was created in, accessible and readable and that identifies
the origin and destination of the record.
Examples of federal laws requiring document retention: the
Income Tax Act, the Customs Act and the Canada Business Corporations
Act.
Security
9 What measures must be taken by companies or ISPs to guarantee the
security of internet transactions?
There is no particular specified technology that must be in place for
ISPs to guarantee the security of internet transactions, but there are
legal obligations to maintain security through compliance with provincial
electronic transactions legislation and applicable consumer
protection legislation must be adhered to.
If the Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century
Act, which has been introduced by the government of the day
is passed into law, ISPs will be required to install ‘intercept-capable’
equipment on their networks and provide police with ‘timely access’ to
subscribers’ personal information, including names, street addresses,
and IP addresses.
10 As regards encrypted communications, can any authorities require
private keys to be made available? Are certification authorities
permitted? Are they regulated and are there any laws as to their
liability?
At present, there is no governmental oversight over encryption,
certification or authorisation operations. The federal government’s
stated position with respect to cryptography is to ‘support the growth
of electronic commerce; allow Canadian producers to export their
products globally within the framework of international arrangements;
and [ensure measures are present] to maintain the capability
of law enforcement agencies to ensure public safety.’ The government
does have various search and seizure rights under the Criminal
Code, the Competition Act and other legislation, subject to the
general requirements for the application of warrants, which could
include the requirement for disclosure of encryption keys. The federal
government is currently considering new legislation to amend the
Competition Act and the Criminal Code that would facilitate law
enforcement (including the Canadian Security Intelligence Service)
interceptions of internet transmissions with a warrant for live data
or a production order for historical data and which would require
ISPs to retain data related to particular investigations.
The federal government through Industry Canada has also published
the Principles for Electronic Authentication, a set of guidelines
developed by various public and private entities. These principles are
not law. The principles focus on the participants in the authentication
process in particular in connection with risk management, privacy
and disclosure management.
What procedures are in place to regulate the licensing of domain
names? Is it possible to register a country‑specific domain name
without being a resident in the country?
Canada has its own internet country code top level domain name,
which is operated by the Canadian Internet Registration Authority
(CIRA), a not-for-profit Canadian corporation. CIRA develops and
implements domain name policy, facilitates dispute resolution and
licenses domain name registrars. CIRA also represents Canada as a
member of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN).
To register for a .ca domain name, the registrant must have a
Canadian presence. To fulfil this requirement, the registrant must fit
within one of 15 categories as follows:
• Canadian citizen;
• permanent resident of Canada;
• legal representative of Canadian citizens or permanent residents
(eg, an executor);
• corporation incorporated under Canadian federal, provincial or
territorial law;
• trust established in Canada;
• partnership registered in Canada;
• Canadian unincorporated association;
• Canadian trade union;
• Canadian political party;
• Canadian educational institution;
• Canadian library, archive or museum;
• Canadian hospital;
• her majesty the queen and her successors;
• Indian band recognised by the Indian Act (Canada);
• aboriginal peoples indigenous to Canada; or
• government or government entities in Canada (represented
by a federal or provincial ministry, for example or a Crown
corporation).
However, notwithstanding the nexus required above, if a registrant
does not fit into any such category, a registrant may still qualify for
registration if the registrant is the owner of a trademark or an official
mark (as defined) that is the subject of a registration under the
Trade Marks Act (Canada) provided that permission is limited to an
application to register a .ca domain name consisting of or including
the exact word component of that registered trademark.
12 Do domain names confer any additional rights (for instance in relation
to trademarks or passing off) beyond the rights that naturally vest in
the domain name?
Beyond the right to use the .ca domain name, the granting of the
domain name does not confer any additional rights in connection
with a trademark or otherwise in terms of common law marks. Under
the Canadian Dispute Resolution Policy administered by CIRA a registrant
must submit to a proceeding if a complainant submits that the
registrant’s dot-ca domain name is confusingly similar to a registered
Canadian trademark in which:
• the complainant had rights prior to the date of registration of the
domain name and continues to have such rights;
• the registrant has no legitimate interest in the domain name;
and
• the registrant has registered the domain name in bad faith.
The terms ‘marks’, ‘rights’, ‘confusingly similar’ and ‘legitimate interests’
are all prescribed by the policy.
Conversely, the fact that a registrant has the domain name will
be a factor in an infringement case, but typically as supporting evidence
of the ‘use’ of the registrant’s trademarks, whether registered
or common law.
Will ownership of a trademark assist in challenging a ‘pirate’
registration of a similar domain name?
Again, registration in Canada of a trademark will assist in challenging
inappropriate registrations of a domain name. CIRA’s CDRP
defines three instances that constitute ‘bad faith’ registration by a
third party: where the domain name has been registered primarily
for the purpose of:
[S]elling, renting, licensing or otherwise transferring the Registration
to the Complainant, or the Complainant’s licensor or licensee of the
Registrant registered the domain name, or acquired the Registration,
primarily for the purpose of valuable consideration in excess of the
Registrant’s actual costs in registering the domain name, or acquiring
the Registration; the Registrant registered the domain name or
acquired the Registration in order to prevent the Complainant, or the
Complainant’s licensor or licensee of the Mark from registering the
Mark as a domain name, provided that the Registrant, alone or in
concert with one or more additional persons has engaged in a pattern
of registering domain names in order to prevent persons who have
Rights in Marks from registering the Marks as domain names; or the
Registrant registered the domain name or acquired the Registration
primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of the Complainant,
or the Complainant’s licensor or licensee of the Mark, who is a
competitor of the Registrant.
CDRP Policy
To use this dispute resolution mechanism to force the transfer of
the ‘bad faith’ registration, the complainant must have a Canadian
registered trademark.
Advertising
14 What rules govern advertising on the internet?
Advertising generally is governed by both federal and provincial laws.
Federally, advertising laws are contained within the Competition Act,
RSC 1985, c.C-34; the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act, RSC
1985, c.C-38; the Textile Labelling Act, RSC 1985, c.T-10; the Precious
Metals Marking Act, RSC 1985, c.P-19; and the Food and Drugs
Act, RSC 1985, c.F-27, all of which fall under the responsibility of the
federally appointed agency, the Competition Bureau. The Competition
Act is the general over-arching legislation that applies to all advertising,
regardless of the platform or method of delivery and whether or
not advertising is made to consumers or business customers.
Contravention of the advertising related provisions, based principally
on misrepresentations in advertising, can be prosecuted by the
Competition Bureau as an offence, or can be dealt with under the
civil sections of the Competition Act, including by the application of
administrative monetary penalties.
Although not law, Canadian Code of Advertising Standards is
administered by a national not-for-profit advertising self-regulatory
body called Advertising Standards Canada. The ASC’s members
include consumer packaged goods companies, advertising agencies
and advisers.
Provincially, legislation revolves around consumer protection
such as the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, SBC
2004, C-2 which addresses all communications or conduct by a
supplier that has the capability, tendency or effect of deceiving or
misleading a consumer. Where such consumer protection legislation
applies specifically to internet-created contracts, such as is the case for
the Ontario legislation, the statute requires the disclosure of certain
information, an express ability to accept or decline the agreement in
favour of the consumer and the requirement for delivery of a written
copy of the agreement within a stipulated time frame.
15 Are there any products or services that may not be advertised or types
of content that are not permitted on the internet?
In addition to the general compliance requirements under the Competition
Act and other more specific legislation cited above, any
advertising of illegal substances, or anything that contains other
illegal materials such as child pornography or hate literature or anything
that leads to a determination that such advertising contravenes
human rights legislation will be subject to the sanctions in applicable
law, including under the Criminal Code.
Financial services
16 Is the advertising or selling of financial services products to
consumers or to businesses via the internet regulated, and if so by
whom and how?
Financial services are governed federally for institutions that are governed
by federal legislation such as the Bank Act, and provincially
for institutions governed by provincial legislation such as, in British
Columbia, the Credit Union Incorporation Act. Other financial
products may be governed by applicable securities laws in Canada.
Federally, oversight of financial institutions broadly described as
‘deposit-taking institutions’, ‘insurance companies’ and pension
plans is by the Office of Superintendant of Financial Institutions
(OSFI). The OSFI’s mandate is to supervise such institutions and to
ensure that sound financial practices are in place and exercise their
powers to intervene to protect the rights and interests of depositors,
policyholders and pension plan members.
As well, certain provincial legislation addresses consumer credit
issues including disclosure of terms of credit arrangements and rights
and obligations of borrowers and guarantors.
Defamation
17 Are ISPs liable for content displayed on their sites?
Canada relies upon common law principles to determine liability.
There are no statutory provisions in Canada either imposing liability
on ISPs or exempting ISPs from liability for content on the internet.
Generally speaking the courts have found that it is the person posting
the content, not the ISP, that is responsible and liable for that content.
In particular, the Supreme Court of Canada in a case brought by
the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada
(the case is known as the Tariff 22 case), found that ISPs simply
provide the means for the telecommunication of published materials,
and, accordingly are shielded from liability under section 2.4(1)(b)
of the Copyright Act, which provides that ‘a person whose only act
in respect of the communication of a work or other subject-matter
to the public consists of providing the means of telecommunication
necessary for another person to so communicate the work or other
subject-matter does not communicate that work or other subjectmatter
to the public.’
18 Can an ISP shut down a web page containing defamatory material
without court authorisation?
While ISPs in Canada have generally successfully argued ‘innocent
dissemination’ of content, and therefore that they are not liable for
having defamatory material posted, there is a ‘chill’ effect to not
having any specific statutory provisions that exempt the ISP from
liability, and therefore, the threat of litigation will often result in
the ISP removing content that is alleged to be defamatory, and the
ISP can generally do so under its contractual terms of service with
customers. In addition, there is no certainty that an ISP will not be
found liable on the grounds either that the ISP did not meet the test
of innocent disseminator or because it was effectively negligent in
failing to know about the defamation. To preserve their defence,
an ISP may remove content on notice that it is defamatory lest they
become liable for being made aware of such content and not taking
prudent steps to eliminate the continued dissemination of that
content to third parties.
Can a website owner link to third‑party websites without permission?
There is no requirement for permission to link to another’s website.
The website link itself is simply to an address.
20 Can a website owner use third‑party content on its website without
permission from the third‑party content provider?
A website owner will be subject to applicable Copyright Act requirements
and will not be able to simply use content that has been
developed and is owned by others on its site. All literary work that
qualifies as such (that is is original, for example) including work that
is written for display via the internet, is covered by the protections
of the Copyright Act.
21 Can a website owner exploit the software used for a website by
licensing the software to third parties?
If the website owner owns, or otherwise licenses and has the right to
sub-license the software, then it may license or otherwise exploit that
software through agreements governed generally by contract.
22 Are any liabilities incurred by links to third‑party websites?
If a link to a website results in the further publication of a copyrighted
work, the party linking may be found to be liable under the
Copyright Act. The mere fact of linking does not provide exposure to
liability, however, most parties are concerned about reputational risk
associated with linking to content that is not monitored for inappropriate
content. Website owners in Canada will often have terms and
conditions posted to their sites with respect to their policies regarding
linking to their site.
Data protection and privacy
23 What legislation defines ‘personal data’ within the jurisdiction?
The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
(PIPEDA) defined ‘personal information’ as information about an
identifiable individual, but does not include the name, title or business
address or telephone number of an employee of an organisation.
The Privacy Act (Canada), which is legislation for the purpose
of extending the present laws of Canada to protect the privacy of
individuals with respect to personal information about themselves
held by a government institution, defines ‘personal information’ as
‘information about an identifiable individual that is recorded in any
form’, and includes information relating to the race, national or ethnic
origin, colour, religion, age or marital status of the individual
and information relating to the education or the medical, criminal
or employment history of the individual or information relating to
financial transactions in which the individual has been involved.
24 Does a website owner have to register with any controlling body to
process personal data? May a website provider sell personal data
about website users to third parties?
The processing of personal data is subject to applicable privacy laws,
either federally under PIPEDA or under provincial legislation such
as the Personal Information Privacy Act, British Columbia. There is
no registration process, nor any controlling body. There are national
and, for provinces with privacy legislation, provincial, privacy commissioners,
but their role is to advocate for privacy issues. For example,
the privacy commissioner of Canada is an officer of parliament
and reports to the house and the senate. Her mandate is to investigate
complaints, conduct audits, pursue court actions under federal laws,
report on personal information handling practices and support and
promote public awareness and understanding of privacy issues.
advertising of illegal substances, or anything that contains other
illegal materials such as child pornography or hate literature or anything
that leads to a determination that such advertising contravenes
human rights legislation will be subject to the sanctions in applicable
law, including under the Criminal Code.
|