Post Tagged with: "talktv"

Bye Bye Netflix by ozcast (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/aoFMi4

The CRTC – Netflix Battle: Could It Lead to a Challenge of the CRTC’s Right to Regulate Online Video?

Netflix just concluded an appearance before the CRTC that resulted in a remarkably heated exchange between the regulator and the Internet video service. The discussion was very hostile with the CRTC repeatedly ordering Netflix to provide subscriber and other confidential information. Netflix expressed concern about the need to keep such information confidential, leaving CRTC Chair Jean-Pierre Blais angry that anyone would doubt the ability of the regulator to maintain the information in confidence. Netflix concern in that regard was understandable given that even confidential information submitted to the CRTC is subject to a public interest test (conversely, U.S. regulators can provide guarantees of confidentiality).

As temperatures increased, the CRTC expressed disappointment over the responses from a company that it said “that takes hundreds of millions of dollars out of Canada” and implicitly threatened to regulate the company by taking away its ability to rely on the new media exception if it did not co-operate with its orders to provide confidential information.

September 19, 2014 — 51 comments — News

Television by ccharmon (CC BY-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/4TWb7g

The CRTC TalkTV Hearing: The Gap Between Can’t and Won’t

In August 1999, I wrote my first technology law column for the Globe and Mail. The column was titled The Gap Between Can’t and Won’t and it focused on the CRTC’s new media decision that was released earlier that year. The decision was the first major exploration into the applicability of conventional CRTC regulation to the Internet, with the Commission ruling that it had the statutory power to regulate some activities (such as streaming video), but it chose not to do so.

That column came to mind yesterday as I read through some of the CRTC’s TalkTV transcripts and listened to Jesse Brown’s Canadaland podcast on the prospect of a “Netflix tax.” It seems to me that both the discussions before the CRTC (particularly the CBC’s decision to urge the Commission to establish a fee-for-carriage model and a Netflix tax) and the Brown podcast with Steve Faguy fail to distinguish between the gap between can’t and won’t.

September 16, 2014 — 5 comments — News

The Netflix Screen by Mike K (CC BY-NC 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/73HcFe

The CRTC’s Future of Television Hearing Turns Into The Netflix Show

Five years ago, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission held two major hearings on new media and the Internet. The 2009 hearings, which featured contributions from the major telecom and broadcast companies in Canada, paved the way for Canadian net neutrality rules and the renewal of a regulatory exemption for new media broadcasters such as online video services.

Despite weeks of hearings, Netflix was only mentioned twice: once when it was referenced in a quote from a U.S. publication on the emergence of Internet video and a second time when a Canadian company referred to its mail-based DVD rental service.

Netflix may not have been top-of-mind in 2009, but my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that today it is seemingly the only thing the industry wants to talk about. New consumer choice of television channels was billed as the centerpiece of the CRTC’s future of television hearing, but witness after witness has turned it into The Netflix Show. Starting with the Ontario government, broadcasters, broadcast distributors, producers, and other creators have lined up to warn ominously about the impact of Netflix on the future of the Canadian television system.

September 15, 2014 — 10 comments — Columns

What is on Television Tonight by Trey Ratcliff (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/t1pU6

The CRTC’s Future of TV Hearing: “There is No Such Thing as Too Much Choice”

Rogers Communications unveiled its plan for streaming more than 1,000 National Hockey League games on the Internet last week. Having invested billions of dollars to obtain the Canadian broadcast and Internet rights to NHL hockey, the cable giant pointed to the future of broadcast by embracing consumer demand for making games available online.

As part of the launch, Rogers Media president Keith Pelley responded to questions about the approach by stating “there’s no such thing as too much choice. Let the consumer decide what they want to watch.” Pelley was speaking about hockey streaming, but my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes his comments should resonate loudly this week in a broader context as the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission opens its much-anticipated public hearing on the future of television in Canada.

The CRTC hearing has already generated thousands of advance comments from major stakeholders and individual Canadians. It has also unleashed considerable angst from established broadcasters, broadcast distributors, and content creators, who fear that the broadcast regulator will overhaul the current system by implementing changes such as mandatory pick-and-pay channel selection for consumers and reforms to longstanding policies such as simultaneous substitution (which allows Canadian broadcasters to substitute Canadian commercials into U.S. licensed programming).

September 8, 2014 — 3 comments — Columns

Is the CRTC Ready to Hit the Reset Button on Television Regulation in Canada?

The Broadcasting Act is a complex statute that lists more than twenty broadcasting policy goals. Yet for decades, Canadian policy has largely boiled down to a single objective: Maximizing the benefits from the broadcasting system for creators, broadcasters, and broadcast distributors such as cable and satellite companies.

Consumers were nowhere to be found in that objective and it showed. Creators benefited from Canadian content requirements and financial contributions that guaranteed the creation of Canadian broadcast content. Broadcasters flourished in a market that permitted simultaneous substitution (thereby enabling big profits from licensing U.S. content) and that kept U.S. giants such as HBO, ESPN, and MTV out of the market for years in favour of Canadian alternatives. Cable and satellite companies became dominant media companies by requiring consumers to purchase large packages filled with channels they did not want in order to access the few they did.

Canadians may have been frustrated with the broadcast system, but there were no obvious alternatives and their views hardly mattered in a regulatory system dominated by the established players. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that last week, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission sent an unmistakable signal that these longstanding rules are about to change.

April 28, 2014 — 6 comments — Columns