Seems CITY will proceed with the HDTV MI broadcast later this month and with other US shows and movies that will be simsubbed exclusively for now on Rogers Cable. (http://sympatico.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/tech/RTGAM/20030102/ecity12a/Technology/techBN/sympatico-technology)

This is a real milestone...

Pretty soon we'll be able to view our beloved ameriken HD programming on a Kenadien HD channel.....with Molson's commercials

It doesn't get much better....

The High Definition signal will be available only on a local Rogers digital cable channel and not on satellite since CHUM, citytv owner, CHUM has an exclusive deal with the cable company.

Excuse me I am busy getting screwed in the west again. I was gonna ask if this was even legal under CRTC regulations but the TMM/Movie Central mess proves that it is. Is there a buisness relationship between CHUM and Rogers?

The High Definition signal will be available only on a local Rogers digital cable channel and not on satellite since CHUM, citytv owner, CHUM has an exclusive deal with the cable company.

That would blow serious chunks if they don't provide this channel to Ottawa and other places that have Rogers HD

Isn't it ironic that the story comes from Sympatico - a Bell web site when Bell will not be carrying CityHD.

Susan Arthur, CHUM's director of marketing, says approval of that application is still pending. "We anticipate it may be within the next two or three months," she says.

Meanwhile, CHUM is proceeding with cable delivery of an HDTV feed, maintaining that CRTC approval is not required for that, as long as it is a simulcast.


Oh oh. Dangerous precedent alert! In two ways:

(1) Bloated bureaucracies don't usual sit well to end-runs and questions of jurisdiction. Does CityTV have a CRTC decree that what they plan to do is permitted?

(2) Remember, the CRTC has already ruled that HD is exempt from simulsub requirements because the content is DIFFERENT. That is HDNBC doesn't have to be substituted with analogue CTV when they are showing the "same" show, because the HD form makes it different in the eyes of the CRTC.

Now CityTV is saying that it is the SAME for purposes of regulating cable broadcasts. If CityTV wins that argument, we may end up with loss of the US HD shows when the Canadian analogue stations (including CityTV) are showing the same show.

We're walking a really fine distinction here.

Gary

Bell will not be carrying CityHD.

What makes you think they won't ?

I'll put money on them doing CityHD in April.

Is it also being broadcast OTA?

Is it also being broadcast OTA?

No. The hurry up and wait CRTC didn't approve them outright at the Nov. hearing.


Susan Arthur, CHUM's director of marketing, says approval of that application is still pending. "We anticipate it may be within the next two or three months," she says.


CHUM isn't challenging the CRTC to regulate OTA broadcasting.

Gary

Anybody got a spot on their sofa on Jan 16? :lol: :lol: :lol: I'm still waiting for Rogers to get the distribution end in my area up to par! :x

Isn't it ironic that the story comes from Sympatico - a Bell web site when Bell will not be carrying CityHD.

Not really ironic, I saw the article on my Sympatico home page and provided the link for all you to read. I'm sure a similar story would be on Canoe, Yahoo etc.

Susan Arthur, CHUM's director of marketing, says approval of that application is still pending. "We anticipate it may be within the next two or three months," she says.

Meanwhile, CHUM is proceeding with cable delivery of an HDTV feed, maintaining that CRTC approval is not required for that, as long as it is a simulcast.


Oh oh. Dangerous precedent alert! In two ways:

(1) Bloated bureaucracies don't usual sit well to end-runs and questions of jurisdiction. Does CityTV have a CRTC decree that what they plan to do is permitted?

(2) Remember, the CRTC has already ruled that HD is exempt from simulsub requirements because the content is DIFFERENT. That is HDNBC doesn't have to be substituted with analogue CTV when they are showing the "same" show, because the HD form makes it different in the eyes of the CRTC.

Now CityTV is saying that it is the SAME for purposes of regulating cable broadcasts. If CityTV wins that argument, we may end up with loss of the US HD shows when the Canadian analogue stations (including CityTV) are showing the same show.

We're walking a really fine distinction here.

Gary

read the CRTC regulations - this is totally legit

and I'm sure by "simulcast" on cable they mean simulcast with the standard defintion program channel (aka - the HD program must be the same program as their SD program)

an ota licence will allow them to run HD programming at any time (aka - not simulcast with city SD)

read the CRTC regulations - this is totally legit


Well, it is a bit murky because the question of what is the same content isn't strongly stated.

Here's an extraction from CRTC 2002-32 (http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2002/pb2002-32.htm) which I think applies:


Accordingly, and except as qualified below, the Commission proposes to permit BDUs to add the distribution of the digital version of an authorized Canadian or non-Canadian service without having to seek further authorization from the Commission. Under this proposal, the addition of such a digital version would be subject to the Access Rules and the Distribution and linkage requirements. This is due to the limited capacity of many BDUs, and the fact that a single HDTV signal will occupy the bandwidth of 4 or 5 digitized analog signals. It would also be subject to the stipulation that the digital version be an A/53 upgrade furnished by the program provider. That is to say, the digital version must not be merely a technical duplication of the analog version, although it is recognized that the amount of high definition programming contained in the A/53 digital version may be quite limited in the early stages of the transition. Further, any condition of licence that currently applies to the distribution by a BDU of an optional and/or a discretionary analog service would also apply to the digital version of the service.

In the case of a new A/53 digital service that does not have an analog version, or the analog version of which has not been authorized for distribution, or for a non-Canadian service the digital rights for which are sold separately from the analog rights, an authorization for distribution would first have to be obtained from the Commission. For example, as is currently the case with analog services, a Canadian sponsor wishing the Commission to add a new, digital non-Canadian service to the Lists of eligible satellite services (the Lists) would be required, in its request to the Commission, to include a statement from the non-Canadian service provider that it does not hold, will not obtain, and will not exercise, preferential or exclusive digital programming rights in relation to the distribution of programming in Canada.

37.
The Commission’s policy proposal with respect to the carriage of optional and discretionary, Canadian and non-Canadian, digital television services is thus as follows:

· A BDU’s authority to distribute an optional and/or discretionary television service, whether it is an over-the-air service, a pay or specialty television service, or a service that appears on the Lists, would be interpreted as including authority to distribute the primary signal of the A/53 version of that service, as furnished by its provider. This authority would be subject to the Access Rules and the Distribution and linkage requirements. It would also be subject to the requirement that the primary signal be an A/53 upgrade of the analog signal.

· Any condition of licence that applies to the authority to distribute an optional and/or a discretionary analog service would also apply to the corresponding A/53 digital version of the service.



Basically, if the service is authorized to carry the analogue version, it can carry the digital version without seeking CRTC approval, as long as the source of the DTV feed is the same program provider.

As long as HD upgraded content is considered the same for simulcast purposes, you and Susan Arthur are right.

But, to make sure that Canadian analogue sources didn't start demanding simulsub on US HD feed, the CRTC declared HD different from standard def. Was this solely for simulsub?

Now, I think the spirit of the CRTC regulations are a transition to DTV and specifically HDTV. So, I can't see any reason why they'd complain about HD versions instead of a plain SDTV feed of the analogue. But we are talking about a government bureaucracy here.

I should point out that when City gets approval for their transitional OTA license, they will be allowed under regulations to broadcast up to 14 hours per week of DIFFERENT content from the normal analogue, as long as it is all HD (you read that right) and 7 or more hours of it are Canadian content (that too).

That is a major difference that they point out would normally require a completely separate license (and years of procedure). It's a throw in to encourage both OTA DTV and specifically OTA HDTV.

There are two false claims by City in this article. First, they are NOT the first to apply for a digital broadcast license. Craig Broadcasting did quite some time ago but the CRTC had no rules in place to even consider such an application, so it was denied. Second, Discovery Channel Canada brought us Eco Challenge via Star Choice in April 2000. It was the ONLY showing of this program in HD in the world! If I remember correctly, it was sponsored by Sony Canada.

I certainly applaud City for their efforts in bringing Canada more HDTV, but let's give credit where credit's due.