I find it hard to believe that a court would require pornography to be furnished by anyone to anyone, except perhaps by a business representing themselves as providers of porn, and collecting a fee for said provision.

I'm pretty sure BWL hit the nail on the head when he guessed that it must have something to do with the motel-chain's contract with a pay-per-view provider. I'm sure that a lot more payments are tendered for a lot more views of porn than of other stuff ~ in motels, anyway, for crying out loud.

Let's get back to that "15% Canadian" requirement.

For your basic one-on-one sexually-explicit scenario, it's gotta be either 100%, 50%, or zero-percent Canadian. To comply, either one or both participants would need to be Canucks, in either case far exceeding the required 15%. How could an economy-minded porn producer just get by by "barely" meeting the legal minimum?

A seven-person orgy featuring a single Canadian would come in at 14.285714...% Canadian, not quite up to snuff. One Canadian out of six would just pass muster at 16-2/3%. I suppose that'd be the way to go...