The article argues that Canada’s long-standing “cultural exemption” language in trade agreements (originating in the 1988 Canada–U.S. Free Trade Agreement and carried into CUSMA) may not adequately cover digital production and on-demand streaming technologies. It highlights potential vulnerabilities in agreements like CPTPP—particularly around e-commerce and differing definitions of “broadcasting”—and suggests Canada seek updated, technology-neutral definitions or adopt UNESCO-based “cultural expressions” language in the upcoming CUSMA review. It cites recent Canadian policy measures affecting streamers (e.g., the Online Streaming Act’s revenue contribution requirements) and platforms involved in news distribution (Online News Act).
Add StreamingMeme as a preferred source on Google to see more of our streaming news at the top of your Search results.
Add as preferred sourceStreaming regulation is increasingly a trade-law problem, not just a CRTC problem. Canada is trying to pull global platforms into funding and distribution rules designed for domestic broadcasting economics—but its key trade shield is anchored in 1988 terminology (“machine-readable,” “broadcasting,” enumerated media). If the exemption doesn’t cleanly map to on-demand, e-commerce, and AI-era creation, policy enforcement becomes a litigation and retaliation risk—especially if the U.S. pushes harder in the upcoming CUSMA review or expands influence via CPTPP. The meme: “broadcast rules are now trade rules.”
