Weekly News (Nov. 13th-19th)

Communications Governance in the News

Compiled by Charnjot Shokar

Research Assistant, Networked Communications Governance Lab

M.A. Candidate, Communication and New Media, McMaster University

Canadian News: Nov. 13-19, 2017

International News: Nov. 13-19, 2017

Press Releases and Decisions: Nov. 13-19, 2017

CRTC

  • [BROADCASTING] Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2017-407: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation – Kelowna and Nakusp, British Columbia – APPROVED – Application to amend the broadcasting licence for the English-language radio station CBTK-FM Kelowna in order to operate an FM transmitter in Nakusp to rebroadcast the programming of its national, English language network service Radio One
  • [BROADCASTING] Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2017-406: Potlotek Communication Society – Chapel Island/Potlotek First Nation, Nova Scotia – APPROVED – Application for a broadcasting licence to operate a low power Type B Native FM radio station in Chapel Island/Potlotek First Nation

Canadian Heritage

Global Affairs

  • Fifth round of NAFTA negotiations in Mexico City

Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Competition Bureau

Microsoft

Upcoming Events: Nov. 20-26, 2017

Supreme Court of Canada

  • [LIBEL / CHOICE OF FORUM] com, et al. v. Mitchell Goldhar (Ontario) (Civil) (By Leave) 37202 Hearing: Nov. 29 2017, 9:30AM Private international law – Choice of forum – Forum non conveniens – Applicable law – Libel action commenced in Ontario over an article published by an Israeli newspaper in print and on its websites – Motion to stay the action on the basis that Ontario courts lack jurisdiction simpliciter or, alternatively, that Israel is a clearly more appropriate forum – What are the limits, if any, to a Court assuming jurisdiction over an alleged libel on the internet simply because it is downloaded by somebody in Canada? – Further, under what circumstances, if any, can the presumption of jurisdiction be rebutted in cases of internet libel? – How should the principle of forum non conveniens apply to internet libel, in order to “temper the consequences of a strict application of the rules governing the assumption of jurisdiction” and have proper regard for the impact of these rules on freedom of expression? – Should the place of “most substantial harm” rather than lex loci delicti apply to determine the applicable law in defamation actions?

Senate of Canada

Canadian House of Commons

CRTC

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada