|
Tuesday December 13, 2011 |
The CRTC yesterday issued a ruling
involving a Telus complaint over Bell's exclusive rights over NFL and
NHL content for its wireless services and its inability to negotiate
similar rights for mobile carriage. The Commission found that Bell gave
itself an undue preference contrary to its 2009 new
media decision
and ordered Bell to take steps to ensure that Telus can access the
programming on reasonable terms. While there are dangers of undue
preferences in the mobile environment and of unfair behaviour arising
from the vertical integration, it is hard to see how this case
qualifies.
The CRTC analysis involves a two-step process. First, it considers
whether an undertaking has given itself a preference or subjected
another person to a disadvantage. If it finds a preference, it moves to
a second step to determine whether the preference is undue. Note that
the burden of demonstrating that the preference was not undue rests
with the undertaking that has granted it.
In this case, the Commission found that Bell granted itself a
preference by entering into an exclusive contract for NHL and NFL
programming. Note that the NFL programming is not something
that Bell produces or otherwise owns. There is also no indication that
the Bell's wireless access to the NFL is linked to similar
licenses for its broadcasting properties (Bell says
the NFL deal was concluded before its purchase of CTV). If this
constitutes a preference, then any exclusive contract will seemingly
rise to the level of a preference and the party that enters into it may
be faced with the burden of demonstrating that it is not an undue
preference (which appears to be precisely what the Commission has in
mind).
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday December 13, 2011 |
|
View
|
|
|
Friday April 15, 2011 |
The Globe and Mail is reporting
that a coalition of broadcasters, broadcast distributors (cable and
satellite companies), and creators groups have written to the CRTC to
ask for a public consultation on over-the-top video providers such as
Netflix. The letter
states:
The Working Group believes indeed,
like the Standing Committee, that foreign over-the-top services are
becoming a significant presence in the domestic market. It is now
public knowledge that a foreign over-the-top service operating in
Canada has commissioned new exclusive dramatic content, including for
the Canadian market. It is buying exclusive rights with studios in the
windows of certain linear Canadian programming services. Therefore, the
Working Group submits that the Commission should initiate the public
consultation recommended by the Standing Committee.
The fight against Netflix is likely to escalate as broadcasters and
broadcast distributors wrap themselves up in the Canadian flag and
proclaim the future of Canadian content depends on new regulation of
online video providers complete with Canadian content requirements and
financial contributions (these are the same broadcasters arguing
for decreased Canadian content requirements on their own networks).
The battle has been brewing over the past few months (I wrote about
Shaw's about face on regulation in January)
and what is particularly striking is how badly Canadian broadcasters
and broadcast distributors understood the future impact of the Internet
on their businesses. The prospect of the Internet becoming a substitute
for conventional broadcast was not exactly a secret at the new media
hearing in 2009. In fact, I wrote about the hearing
and the Internet
streaming of movies
in back-to-back columns just before the hearing started. But consider
the comments of Canada's broadcasters and broadcast distributors then
and now. Earlier this month, Shaw told
the CRTC:
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareFriday April 15, 2011 |
|
View
|
|
|
Wednesday April 07, 2010 |
|
The transcript of my recent appearance on new media before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage has now been posted. The discussion focused on a wide range of topics including copyright, Amazon, and the private copying levy. Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareWednesday April 07, 2010 |
|
|
Thursday March 25, 2010 |
Earlier today, I appeared before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage as its first witness on a new study on Canada and New Media. I've posted my opening remarks below, but the 90 minute discussion is much more interesting as it covered a wide range of issues from copyright to the iPod levy to networks to the digitization in Canada. An audio stream is available now and the transcript should come early next week.
Appearance before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage
March 25, 2010
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareThursday March 25, 2010 |
|
View
|
|
|
