Blocking pirates… even those that don't exist yet: the Federal Court's new order

Every time a pirate site is blocked, another one appears under a new name. Rights holders know it: blocking orders, however useful, often run behind the pirates.

On July 3, 2026, the Federal Court issued a decision that changes this logic. The order in file T-1127-26, signed by Justice Richard Southcott and made public on July 23, targets 13 pirate services, but it also allows, through a simplified procedure, the addition of similar services that appear under other brands. Hence its nickname in the trade press: the “expanded scope” order.

In this article, we look at what the decision provides, its safeguards and what it changes for rights holders.

Who is targeted?

The application was filed by Rogers, Groupe TVA and several major studios: Columbia Pictures, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Universal and Warner Bros.

It targets thirteen services, including subscription IPTV services such as Apollo Group TV, Diablo IPTV and Smart4K, and well-known streaming sites such as 123Movies, FMovies, Putlocker and WatchSeries. This is the first time a Canadian order has brought both forms of piracy together in a single decision.

Eight internet service providers must implement the blocking: Bell, Eastlink, Cogeco, Rogers, SaskTel, TekSavvy, Telus and Vidéotron. Rogers and Vidéotron consented; the others took no position.

The real novelty: the simplified procedure

Until now, blocking a new domain meant going back to court in practice. The new order provides a faster route.

To add a platform, the applicants must show that it meets several conditions:

• its sole or main purpose is the unauthorized provision of content;
• it distributes at least some of the applicants’ works;
• its operation is comparable to that of the services already targeted;
• it is accessible in Canada;
• a notice was sent to its operator where a contact exists, with no response within 7 days.

The applicants then file an updated list and a sworn statement. An internet service provider that objects has 5 business days to do so. If there is no objection, the updated list applies, without a new hearing. Additions remain confidential for a few days after they are implemented, so as not to tip off the pirates, and cannot be filed more than once every 10 business days.

Safeguards against overblocking

The Court has put limits on the mechanism:

• the applicants must remove a domain that is no longer pirate, or an address that also hosts other sites;
• internet service providers may suspend a block to correct overblocking or for security reasons;
• any operator or customer affected may request a variation within 30 days;
• the applicants reimburse the internet service providers for implementation costs;
• the order is limited to two years.

A subscriber who tries to reach a blocked site is redirected to a bilingual notice page, which explains the situation and can present legal offers.

Not everyone is convinced. TekSavvy, which had challenged Canada’s very first blocking order, reminds us that it sees these orders as a serious infringement of net neutrality. It did not, however, oppose this one.

Seven years of blocking in Canada

This decision is part of a rapid evolution:

• 2019: first blocking order in Canada, against the GoldTV service, later upheld by the Federal Court of Appeal;
• 2022: first “dynamic” blocking of pirate NHL streams, in real time during games;
• 2024: multi-sport order, extended season after season through to the 2026 World Cup, and expired on July 19, 2026;
• 2026: expanded-scope order, targeting present and future services.

In its decision, the Court relies in particular on British practice: in May 2026, the High Court in London had already issued an order that updates itself when pirates change domains. Elsewhere in Europe, France’s Arcom has had 15,189 domains blocked since 2022, including 6,496 sports-related ones in 2025 alone.

Québecor welcomed the decision on July 23: “For years, Quebecor has stood behind judicial site blocking as an indispensable mechanism to defend both creators and consumers against digital piracy.”

What this changes for rights holders

Blocking does not replace the other tools: it only affects the targeted internet service providers, and mainly residential subscribers. But the simplified procedure rewards one thing: the quality of the file.

• Document each platform against the conditions of the order: presence of your works, access from Canada, notice sent and its date.
• Spot mirrors and name changes early: the 7-day period only starts when the notice is sent.
• Combine tools: blocking, removal from Google results and notices to hosting providers.

This is exactly the work our monitoring does every night: finding copies of your content, identifying the new domains of a same family of sites and keeping a dated record of every notice. If you want to know where your titles are circulating, start with our free analysis or talk to an expert.

Sources

• Federal Court, order T-1127-26 (July 3, 2026): Order PDF
• Québecor, press release of July 23, 2026: newswire.ca
• TekSavvy, page on filtering: teksavvy.com
• TorrentFreak (July 23, 2026): torrentfreak.com
• Torys, on the confirmation of the GoldTV order (2021): torys.com
• Arcom, review of the fight against piracy in 2025: arcom.fr