|
Tuesday November 20, 2012 |
The Canadian Association of Broadcasters has applied
to the Copyright Board of Canada for a radical overhaul of the current
fees paid by radio stations for commercial radio reproduction of music.
The CAB argues that in light of copyright reforms in Bill C-11 and the
Supreme Court of Canada's rulings on fair dealing, there is no legal
basis for several tariffs proposed by CMRRA-SODRAC (CSI), AVLA, and
ACTRA and that the rate on earlier approved tariffs should be significantly reduced.
The CAB position on the impact of the law is that:
The result of the changes to the Copyright Act made by the Copyright Modernization Act, when combined with the fair dealing right as applied in ESA, is to
eliminate or significantly reduce the liability of radio broadcasters
for the reproductions made by them in the course of their broadcasting
activities. Even the reproduction collectives agree that the legislative
changes alone will eliminate most liability of radio broadcasters for
reproductions of music.
broadcasters, cab, copyright, csi, fair dealing Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday November 20, 2012 |
|
View
|
|
|
Tuesday May 24, 2011 |
Earlier this month, Bell and Quebecor, two giants in the Canadian
broadcasting and telecom landscape, became embroiled in a dispute over
Sun News Network, the recently launched all-news network. At first
glance, the dispute appeared to be little more than a typical
commercial fight over how much Bell should pay to Quebecor to carry the
Sun News Network on its satellite television package. When the parties
were unable to reach agreement, Bell removed Sun News Network, leaving
a placeholder message indicating "the channel has been taken down at
the request of the owners of Sun News Network."
While the dispute is now before the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission - Quebecor claims Bell is violating the
legal requirement against "undue preferences"- more interesting is
Bell’s claim about the value of Sun News Network signal.
According to Mirko Bibic, senior vice-president of regulatory
affairs
at Bell Canada, the market value of Sun News Network is zero because
Quebecor makes the signal available free over-the-air in Toronto and is
currently streaming it free on the Internet. Given the free access,
Bell maintains that the signal no longer has a market value.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto
Star version, homepage
version) notes Bibic's comment may be posturing for negotiation
purposes, but it
highlights the larger problem for Canadian broadcasters and broadcast
distributors such as cable and satellite providers.
bdu, bell, broadcasters, internet streaming, quebecor Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday May 24, 2011 |
|
View
|
|
|
Tuesday May 24, 2011 |
Appeared
in the Toronto Star on May 21, 2011 as Can Canadian Broadcasters
Compete With Free?
Earlier this month, Bell and Quebecor, two giants in the Canadian
broadcasting and telecom landscape, became embroiled in a dispute over
Sun News Network, the recently launched all-news network. At first
glance, the dispute appeared to be little more than a typical
commercial fight over how much Bell should pay to Quebecor to carry the
Sun News channel on its satellite television package. When the parties
were unable to reach agreement, Bell removed Sun News Network, leaving
a placeholder message indicating "the channel has been taken down at
the request of the owners of Sun News Network."
While the dispute is now before the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission - Quebecor claims Bell is violating the
legal requirement against "undue preferences"- more interesting is
Bell’s claim about the value of Sun News Network signal.
According to Mirko Bibic, senior vice-president of regulatory affairs
at Bell Canada, the market value of Sun News Network is zero because
Quebecor makes the signal available free over-the-air in Toronto and is
currently streaming it free on the Internet. Given the free access,
Bell maintains that the signal no longer has a market value.
Bibic's comment may be posturing for negotiation purposes, but it
highlights the larger problem for Canadian broadcasters and broadcast
distributors such as cable and satellite providers.
The reality of the current environment is that all broadcasters must
compete with free. Free streaming has become so common that devices
such as the Boxee have popped up to offer users a seemingly unlimited
array of legal on-demand television programs all streamed via the
Internet. Indeed, if the value associated with broadcasts is directly
correlated to its free availability online, a growing percentage of
broadcaster content has no market value.
The implications for Canadian broadcasters are significant since their
ongoing fight for a fee-for-carriage (or value-for-signal) is premised
on the notion that their broadcasts have value, independent of their
availability on other platforms.
Moreover, Canadian broadcasters continue to rely on foreign (primarily
U.S.) content as their most profitable and high profile programming.
Given the shift toward online streaming, it is only a matter of time
before U.S. rights holders retain their Internet rights to stream
content on a global basis. When that happens, Canadian broadcasters
will be left vying for less valuable broadcast-only rights.
The situation is little better for Canada's broadcast distributors who
view streaming alternatives with growing trepidation. Free online
streaming, when combined with over-the-top video services such as
Netflix or new video rental services from YouTube, provides an
increasingly viable, low-cost alternative to traditional cable or
satellite television services.
The Internet based streams effectively reduce the value of a cable or
satellite television subscription since much of what is now offered
through those services is, by Bell's own definition, of no market
value.
Claims that broadcast versions of free streamed programs have no market
value may be an exaggeration, but there is a harsh truth in the reality
that Internet streaming is having a disruptive effect on both Canadian
broadcasters and broadcast distributors. Given these emerging
challenges and the vertically integrated market in which Canadian
broadcasters, broadcast distributors, and Internet providers are often
part of the same corporate family, the backlash is likely to be fierce.
Internet providers already deploy usage based billing schemes to
increase the cost of free Internet streaming by hiking the price of
Internet access. On the regulatory front, there is the growing push to
increase the costs to companies that stream content by imposing
broadcast-like regulations.
These moves may create new challenges for online alternatives, but they
will not solve the long-term broadcaster and broadcast distributor
problems of relying on programs that by their own admission faces
diminishing market value.
Michael Geist holds the Canada
Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of
Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online
at www.michaelgeist.ca.
bdu, broadcasters, free, internet streaming Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday May 24, 2011 |
|
|
Wednesday March 02, 2011 |
Last year, Canadian broadcasters launched a major public campaign to
"Save Local TV", which was their effort to rally support for new fees
for retransmission of local television signals. The Federal Court of
Appeal ruled
this week that the CRTC has the legal power to authorize networks to
negotiate to be paid for carrying stations, though the recent
convergence in the marketplace may render the entire issue moot.
Interestingly, Canadian radio broadcasters are now using the same
strategy as part of their support for Bill C-32. A new campaign - isupportmylocalradio.ca
- has been launched complete with radio ads and a webpage. The goal of
the campaign is to express support for Bill C-32, particularly the
reforms that will save radio broadcasters tens of millions of dollars.
The claims
mirror those in the fee-for-carriage campaign - "Local radio in Canada
may be threatened if Bill C-32 is not passed as introduced by the
Government. This much needed Bill may fail because the Liberal Party
wants an amendment that would have local radio stations send money to
big recording companies outside Canada." The broadcasters appear
before
the C-32 committee on Thursday.
broadcasters, c-32, copyright, radio Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareWednesday March 02, 2011 |
|
|
