Canada's Notice-and-Notice Regime, Explained

Canada is not the United States

The overwhelming majority of copyright explanation online describes the American DMCA: takedown notices, counter-notices, safe harbours. None of that is Canadian law, and applying it here produces wrong conclusions.

Canada operates a notice-and-notice regime, set out in sections 41.25 to 41.27 of the Copyright Act and in force since January 2015. The mechanics are different, and so are the consequences.

How it actually works

A copyright owner who believes an IP address was used to infringe sends a notice to the internet provider responsible for that address. The provider is required to forward the notice to the subscriber and to retain records identifying that subscriber for a set period.

That is the whole obligation. The provider forwards and retains. It does not remove anything, it does not suspend the account, and — this is the part most people do not realise — it does not tell the copyright owner who you are.

• The rightsholder knows an IP address. They do not know your name.
• Your provider knows your name. They have not disclosed it.
• Linking the two requires a court order, which is a separate legal step with its own threshold.

What a notice may not contain

This part was tightened in 2018 after a period in which forwarded notices were being used to press recipients for money. The Act now prohibits a notice from containing a settlement offer or demand for payment, a request for personal information, or a hyperlink to anything doing either.

So a forwarded notice demanding a payment to make the matter go away does not comply with the statute. If you receive one, that itself is worth knowing — and it is a strong reason not to respond to it directly.

What it is not

A notice is an allegation made by a private party, forwarded by your provider because the law requires it. It is not a court finding, not a fine, and not evidence that anything has been decided. Providers forward them without assessing whether they are correct, because the statute gives them no role in evaluating the claim.

Statutory damages for non-commercial infringement in Canada are also capped — between $100 and $5,000 in total for all works in all proceedings, which is a materially different exposure from the American figures people are used to reading about.

Why this matters when choosing a service

Because it lets you evaluate what you are being told. A service claiming that Canadian law works like the DMCA, or that a VPN changes your legal position, or that notice-and-notice is a penalty regime, is either mistaken or hoping you are.

Our own position is on the copyright policy page, and the broader question of what is and is not permitted is covered separately. Neither of those pages is written to reassure you — they are written to be accurate.

Questions

Does Canada use DMCA takedown?

No. The DMCA is American legislation with no application in Canada. Canadian law uses notice-and-notice under the Copyright Act, where a provider forwards a notice and retains records but removes nothing and identifies nobody.

Can my ISP give my name to a copyright owner?

Not under the notice-and-notice regime itself. Identifying a subscriber to a rightsholder requires a court order, which is a separate application with its own legal test.