Columns

Isn’t There a Better Way to Spend $750 Million?

As is the case with all mergers involving Canadian broadcast companies, the proposed Bell Media purchase of television and radio giant Astral immediately generated interest in the Canadian television production community, who anticipated yet another huge payday that follows from each of these deals. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, which must approve the transaction, requires purchasers to “make clear and unequivocal commitments to provide tangible benefits representing 10 percent of the value of a transaction” (the percentage for television assets is typically 10 percent and 6 percent for radio assets).

Given the rapid pace of consolidation in the Canadian broadcasting industry, the size of these tangible benefits packages, which often provide funding for new Canadian productions, has grown dramatically in recent years. In 2007, Astral’s purchase of Standard Radio led to a $12 million benefits package, Rogers acquisition of five CITY-TV stations resulted in a $37.5 million benefits package, and CTVglobemedia’s purchase of CHUM netted over $100 million. In 2010, Shaw’s purchase of Canwest Global generated a $180 million benefits package. The Bell purchase of CTVglobemedia in 2011 topped that with a $239 million benefits package and now the Bell Media – Astral deal could be even bigger.

May 11, 2012 — 6 comments — Columns

Canada’s Domain Name Agency to the Public: We Don’t Trust You

The Canadian Internet Registration Authority, the non-profit agency charged with managing the dot-ca domain name, has emerged in recent years as an important voice on Internet governance. Backed by a big bank account – CIRA earns millions of dollars each year for maintaining the domain name registry – it has launched an annual Internet governance forum attended by hundreds of Canadians, partnered with various groups to help small businesses establish an online presence, and sponsored many Canadian Internet-related events.

Yet just as CIRA begins to fulfill its potential as an “important public resource” (as described in its mandate letter from the Government of Canada), my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes it has proposed a new governance structure that seeks to sideline the public by limiting the ability to serve on the CIRA board. With more than a million registrants, CIRA is one of Canada’s largest Internet organizations and its message to members is clear: we don’t trust you.

April 30, 2012 — 11 comments — Columns

Other People’s Money: Why AUCC Signed the Most Expensive Copyright Insurance Policy in Cdn History

Car rental companies are infamous for encouraging customers to sign up for expensive liability insurance policies. Since many renters already have coverage from their own automotive insurance policies or can rely upon insurance coverage provided by their credit card issuer, the decision whether to sign up for a costly additional policy frequently depends upon who is paying the bill. If the individual is on the hook, they will often decline coverage and rely on their existing policies. If someone else is paying, it becomes easier to justify signing up for the additional coverage.

Last week, the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada, which represents dozens of Canada’s leading universities, signed up for one of the most expensive copyright insurance policies in Canadian history. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes the policy comes in the form of a controversial model copyright licensing agreement with Access Copyright, a copyright collective that licenses copying and distribution of copyrighted works such as books, journals, and other texts. Should AUCC members sign the agreement – it falls to each individual university to decide whether to do so – they will pay $26 per full time student per year for the right to copy works from the Access Copyright repertoire.

April 24, 2012 — 25 comments — Columns

Cutting Community Internet Access Program Highlights Absence of Digital Strategy

The recent federal budget was a hefty 498 pages, but my weekly technology law column (Ottawa Citizen version, homepage version) notes it still omitted disclosing the decision to eliminate funding for the Community Access Program, Canada’s longstanding initiative to provide an Internet access alternative for those without connectivity. The world has changed dramatically since the CAP was first launched in 1995, but the decision to cut it without establishing alternative solutions for low-income Canadians who are not online is a disappointing development that highlights yet again the absence of a national digital strategy from Industry Minister Christian Paradis.

The CAP was once a foundational element in the federal government’s effort to connect Canadians. In the late 1990s, many did not have Internet access at home and wireless data plans were still years away. Today, the majority of Canadians have residential broadband access as well as wireless connectivity through their smartphones or other devices.

The decision to cut the CAP therefore does not come as a surprise.

April 18, 2012 — 9 comments — Columns

Should Canadians Have to Pay For TV Channels They Don’t Want?

Consumers have become accustomed to lots of choice for entertainment and information services. Music and movie services offer single downloads and a range of subscription models, while newspapers and magazines sell their content as individual issues or subscriptions on multiple platforms.

Yet Canadian cable and satellite providers remain a stubborn holdout. The broadcast community has long resisted a market-oriented approach that would allow consumers to exercise real choice in their cable and satellite packages, instead demanding a corporate welfare regulatory framework that guarantees big profits and mediocre programming. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that could have changed had the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission pushed back against Bell Media in a major case involving the terms of broadcast distribution, but a ruling late last week indicated that it remains reluctant to do so.

April 10, 2012 — 23 comments — Columns