GATINEAU – The CRTC Thursday asked the industry how it should – or if it should – regulate TV on the mobile phone handset.
As reported last month by www.cartt.ca, this issue has been emerging from behind the scenes throughout 2005 as both Bell Mobility, Rogers Wireless and Look Communications announced plans to offer television channels to its mobile customers.
When those announcements happened earlier this year, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters sent a letter to the Commission asking it to make a determination as to how TV to the handset should be regulated under the Broadcast Act.
“In its letter, the CAB requested that the Commission seek clarification as to the nature of these broadcasting services, ‘in order to determine the appropriate form of regulation pursuant to the Broadcasting Act,’” reads today’s call for comments.
When the CRTC then asked the nation’s wireless carriers what they thought, the Commission was told that the TV signals are delivered over the public Internet (Bell and Rogers plan to use MobiTV technology and Telus hasn’t said) and are therefore not subject to regulation, and instead fall under the 1999 New Media Exemption Order.
Not so, say the broadcasters. Television is television, whatever the mode of delivery or viewing device, so existing linkage rules for Canadian and U.S. channels and contribution levels to program production should apply.
“We feel pretty confident that the new media exemption order exempts us from regulation,” Rogers Communications vice-president, regulatory, Ken Englehart told www.cartt.ca last month.
“The Commission has enquired into this – and is predisposed to viewing it as part of their regulatory space,” CHUM Ltd.’s vice-president of planning and regulatory affairs Peter Miller told www.cartt.ca last month as well. “I can assure you now (the satellite radio) precedent is being looked at by all wireless operators who are saying ‘we don’t want to be regulated but if we are, we want the same deal as these guys – which says we can bring in whatever foreign video services we want, so out goes the eligible satellite list.’
And, if that happens for cell phones, it’ll spread to DTH and cable, Miller added.
“I think the broadcasters should take a chill pill here,” countered Englehart in last month’s story. “They are so heavily into protectionist mode that they are not thinking clearly on this. (Mobile TV) is absolutely not a threat to the Canadian broadcasting system in any way. They should allow this medium to grow a bit and see what happens – which is precisely the thinking behind the new media exemption order.
“You are not going to get one single subscriber in Canada that cancels their cable TV service, because they’re getting their TV over the cell phone,” added Englehart.
Regardless, the Commission has begun its process. Comments are due in a month (September 12th) and must address these three questions, which, as worded, seem to suggest the CRTC doesn’t think cell phone TV falls directly under the Broadcast Act and that perhaps need a new order all its own:
1) Do the proposed services fall within the scope of the New Media Exemption Order?
2) If the proposed services do not fall within the scope of the New Media Exemption Order, should a new exemption order be issued covering these services?
3) If a new exemption order should be issued, what should be its scope?
