News

The PlayBook Tax: Why the Conservative’s Copyright Plans Create a Hidden Cost for RIM’s PlayBook

Research in Motion, Canada’s technology giant, releases its much-anticipated PlayBook this week. The PlayBook, a tablet competitor to the Apple iPad, is enormously important to the company and some commentators have cited its importance to the country as well. This weekend, the Globe noted “there is a lot on the line for Canada, too, of course – not because it needs the PlayBook but because the country’s technology sector has come to rest heavily on RIM’s success.”

Given its importance, one would think that Canada’s political parties would ensure that their policies do not create unnecessary roadblocks or barriers to its success. Yet the Conservative plan for copyright reform (as found in Bill C-32) establishes a significant barrier that could force many consumers to pay hundreds in additional costs in order to switch their content from existing devices to the PlayBook.

The PlayBook may be competitively priced with the iPad, but the hidden cost of transferring content to the new device – effectively a PlayBook tax – may mean that many Canadian consumers take a pass.

April 18, 2011 — 51 comments — News

The iPod Tax, the iTunes Tax and the Notepad Tax

Ariel Katz has a great post on the iPod Tax (“the Tories’ claim is not factually accurate”) and other copyright taxes, including the iTunes tax and the Notepad tax.

April 18, 2011 — 1 comment — News

Cancon, The Opera

The National Post’s Terence Corcoran takes on the broadcaster attempt to regulate Netflix, noting regulation supporters “want the Internet controlled through new rules and new charges that would expand their existing protection racket that now funnels billions into their hands and limits the freedom of Canadians.

April 18, 2011 — 2 comments — News

What a Difference Two Years Can Make: Canadian Broadcasters and Distributors on the Internet

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:

April 15, 2011 — 49 comments — News