Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

CRTC Release on Fee For Carriage Issue (March 22, 2010)

35K views 235 replies 81 participants last post by  ScaryBob 
#1 · (Edited)
As has been speculated in the press and in other threads, the CRTC will be releasing a report on the state of the Canadian TV Broadcasting Industry today on what is being referred to as the "Regulatory Policy framework on group-based licencing of ownership groups".

From the CRTC web site:
Please be advised that Monday’s release (March 22nd) will be at 4 p.m. [Ottawa time]
Discuss the March 22, 2010 CRTC release here.
 
#2 ·
Media "Lock-Up" for CRTC Release Event

Media Advisory - CRTC Media Lock-Up - Regulatory Policy framework on group-based licencing of ownership groups

WHEN: March 22, 2010
Lock-up: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

WHERE: CRTC Central Office
1 Promenade du Portage, Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
Central Building, Gatineau, Quebec

OTTAWA-GATINEAU, March 16 /CNW Telbec/ - On March 22, 2010, a media lock-up will be held from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) for the Regulatory Policy framework on group-based licencing of ownership groups.
Any parties interested in attending the lock-up are asked to contact Peggy Nebout at 819-953-4466 or peggy.nebout@crtc.gc.ca by March 19 at 12:00 p.m. Due to space constraints, only one reporter is allowed per news organization. They will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement upon arrival.
No one will be permitted to leave the lock-up before 4:00 p.m. Cameras are not allowed in the designated room. They may be set up in the main floor lobby at 1 Promenade du Portage. Cell phones, wireless handheld devices (e.g. Blackberries), pagers, etc. must be left with the CRTC staff in the room. Laptop owners must disable wireless capabilities prior to arriving at the CRTC. Telephone lines and Internet will be available at the CRTC at 4 p.m.
http://www.cnw.ca/fgov/en/releases/archive/March2010/16/c2278.html
 
#3 ·
The CRTC will rule Monday on the so-called TV tax or fee for carriage, a cost that cable companies have said could add $10 a month to consumers' bills if the regulator rules they have to pay broadcasters for their local signals.
"We don't want to pay anymore to what just virtually comes out to being a tax on everybody," Cran said.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is expected to release details of a negotiating framework to allow the two parties to work out the value of a TV signal, along with other financial issues.
http://www.thestar.com/business/media/article/783077--crtc-to-rule-on-tv-tax-dispute
 
#4 ·
A whole bunch of info relating to Conventional Television in Canada has been released on the CRTC website. Including a new group-based television regulatory policy and a call for comments on the DTV transition.

As part of its framework, the Commission has set out a market-based solution to allow private local television stations to negotiate with cable and satellite companies. Each television station would have the option of entering into negotiations to establish a fair value for the distribution of their programs.
“The current dispute between conventional broadcasters and distributors threatens the overall integrity of the broadcasting system,” said Mr. von Finckenstein. “Broadcasters and distributors have a symbiotic relationship. The time has come for them to put their differences aside and work together to ensure the continuation of conventional television, which Canadians clearly value.”
 
#6 ·
the only thing I like after reading through the release is:

-The CRTC is going to really "force" them to produce Canadian programing.
-Their also really "forcing" the DTV transition on them. The CRTC is also really cleared up a bunch of details around the transition including which markets will be in the "forced" transition.

Other then that, let the TV TAX begin.
 
#9 ·
The CRTC has referred the issue of Value for signal (not Fee for carriage) to the Federal Court of Appeal to decide whether the CRTC has the power to implement a value for signal regime. If the court deems they do have the power to do this then, according to the CRTC release they will implement a system whereby BDU's and broadcasters can negotiate a value for their stations. Here is the official info from the CRTC:

Licensees of private local television stations would choose whether i) they will negotiate with BDUs for the value of the distribution of their programming services, failing which they will be able to require deletion of the programming they own, or for which they have the exhibition rights, from all signals distributed in their market, or ii) they will continue to benefit from existing regulatory protections.



2. Licensees of private local television stations would make their choice by a date set by the Commission, and this choice would be valid for a fixed term of three years.



3. If a licensee of a private local television station chose option i):



a) It would forego all existing regulatory protections related to the distribution of local television signals by BDUs, whether imposed by regulation or by condition of licence, including mandatory distribution and priority channel placement on analog basic, and simultaneous substitution.



b) BDUs would be required, at the request of private local television stations, to delete any program owned by the licensee of that local television station or for which it has acquired exclusive contractual exhibition rights.


c) Deletions would be exercised against the signal of any programming undertaking distributed by the BDU, whether foreign or domestic, affiliated or not, including that of the private local television station making the request.


d) It could negotiate with a BDU for a fair value in exchange for the distribution of its programming service in lieu of the deletion rights set out in b) and c). This compensation could be monetary, non-monetary (e.g., simultaneous or non-simultaneous substitution, carriage arrangements, marketing and promotion), or both, and could be negotiated on an individual station basis or as part of a broader negotiation with entire ownership groups.


e) Parties to the negotiation would be given a fixed period after the date on which the licensee of a private local television station chose option i) to conclude negotiations, during which the existing regulatory protections would continue to apply. This period could be shortened or extended by agreement between the parties.


f) The Commission would minimize its involvement in the terms and conditions of the resulting agreements, intervening only in cases where there is evidence parties are not negotiating in good faith, and would consider acting as arbitrator only where both parties make a request.


4. If the licensee of a private local television station chose option ii), all regulatory protections for private local television stations in force at the time the choice is made, and as amended during the term in which that choice is valid, would remain in force. These would include, where provided by regulation or by condition of licence: mandatory carriage, priority channel placement on analog basic, program deletion, simultaneous or non-simultaneous substitution, and any payments to individual stations or funds approved by the Commission in lieu of these obligations, including payments for carriage of distant signals as provided for in Broadcasting Public Notice 2008-100.
 
#10 ·
CRTC

This was taken from the CBC web site:

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2010/03/22/crtc-tv-value-fee-signal.html



The CRTC has ruled that Canada's TV broadcasters can seek payment for their over-the-air signals from cable and satellite companies, but is deferring the final judgment to the Federal Court of Appeal.

"Broadcasters and distributors have a symbiotic relationship. The time has come for them to put their differences aside and work together to ensure the continuation of conventional television, which Canadians clearly value," Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission chair Konrad von Finckenstein said Monday in a statement.

The cable and satellite companies have argued that, under the Broadcast Act, the CRTC doesn't have the authority to force payment for conventional television signals.

The CRTC said it must consult the court to ensure it has the jurisdiction to impose the negotiations between the two sides.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2010/03/22/crtc-tv-value-fee-signal.html#ixzz0iwKn3o6T


So as I look at this the CRTC has chickened out again.
 
#35 ·
This was taken from the CBC web site:

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2010/03/22/crtc-tv-value-fee-signal.html



The CRTC has ruled that Canada's TV broadcasters can seek payment for their over-the-air signals from cable and satellite companies, but is deferring the final judgment to the Federal Court of Appeal.

"Broadcasters and distributors have a symbiotic relationship. The time has come for them to put their differences aside and work together to ensure the continuation of conventional television, which Canadians clearly value," Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission chair Konrad von Finckenstein said Monday in a statement.

The cable and satellite companies have argued that, under the Broadcast Act, the CRTC doesn't have the authority to force payment for conventional television signals.

The CRTC said it must consult the court to ensure it has the jurisdiction to impose the negotiations between the two sides.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2010/03/22/crtc-tv-value-fee-signal.html#ixzz0iwKn3o6T


So as I look at this the CRTC has chickened out again.
So why can`t the crtc make a decision and enforce it?
 
#11 ·
(flush)

That's the sound of the CRTC flushing the broadcast system down the toilet by throwing good money after bad. They've sparked a prolonged legal battle that'll make both sides look foolish, and in the end consumers will pay more. They will rush out the door to OTA, Internet and theft.
 
#14 ·
So, when do I get the option to not pay for these stations, like I have for digital stations? I notice these stations are still protected, if you don't subscribe to CTV and they show an American show (which is mostly what they do), the cable company would be forced to remove that show from the American station.

Just another method of holding the public hostage. We need a free market in this country, instead of this over regulation nonsense.
 
#36 ·
Answers below supposing post #9 from PlayitSimple is correct.

So, when do I get the option to not pay for these stations, like I have for digital stations? I notice these stations are still protected, if you don't subscribe to CTV and they show an American show (which is mostly what they do), the cable company would be forced to remove that show from the American station.
That "protection" would have to be part of the negotiatged terms between the station and BDU. All current mandated protections are eliminated (and may become negotated) when a station chooses to negotiate carriage with a provider, with the exception of a station having the right to ask a provider to black out programming whic they have the exclusive/primary exhibition right, regardless of carriage status.

And then I watch ABC/CBS/NBC/Fox simsub-free (albeit temporarily). And they can't black out the American network each time they run a show CTV has the Canadian broadcast rights to.
So long as you watch them from antenna.

If you watch them on a Canadian BDU that has failed to negotiate carriage with a Canadian station, you may see black or the same slate.
 
#15 ·
Tridus said:
So, when do I get the option to not pay for these stations, like I have for digital stations? I notice these stations are still protected, if you don't subscribe to CTV and they show an American show (which is mostly what they do), the cable company would be forced to remove that show from the American station.
No I don't see that they are protected. If Rogers refuses to pay Global, Global can yank it's signal.

From Financial Post
Under solution proposed, private-sector TV broadcaster can opt to stay in current regulated system, or choose to enter negotiations. Once choice is made, the decision is final. Agreements between broadcasters and cable are expected to last three years.
i.e.
If Global opts for negotiations, that's it - they have to negotiate. If they can't come to a negotiated settlement how would they possibly force a BDU to pay for the signal?
 
#47 ·
No I don't see that they are protected. If Rogers refuses to pay Global, Global can yank it's signal.

From Financial Post


i.e.
If Global opts for negotiations, that's it - they have to negotiate. If they can't come to a negotiated settlement how would they possibly force a BDU to pay for the signal?
They are protected though. Right here: i) they will negotiate with BDUs for the value of the distribution of their programming services, failing which they will be able to require deletion of the programming they own, or for which they have the exhibition rights, from all signals distributed in their market

The way that reads, if they simsub a show now, they could force it off the air entirely unless an agreement is reached. Which means a lot of American shows would get blacked out.

It's a total farce. We need a non-spineless politician in this country so someone can actually stand up against these insane regulators.

(On another note, how are you guys replying to two people at once? If I try to get the advanced reply window, any quoted text disappears.)
 
#16 ·
If a new black market of paid subcriptions to DirecTV and Dish Network via an American PO box is what it takes to send the message to the lazy, greedy, poorly-run "Canadian" networks to get the message that they're not wanted, so be it. Let the games begin! In the mean time, I will be enjoying Nickelodeon and Disney Channel from the US that whip YTV and Family Channel.

Does this FFC include CBC/SRC? Is a BILLION dollars a year not enough for them?
 
#34 ·
If a new black market of paid subcriptions to DirecTV and Dish Network via an American PO box is what it takes to send the message to the lazy, greedy, poorly-run "Canadian" networks to get the message that they're not wanted, so be it.
A black market subscription says nothing to the Canadian media industry at all, mostly because it is done on the hush-hush.

Does this FFC include CBC/SRC? Is a BILLION dollars a year not enough for them?
No it does not, at least according to the report on the CBC.
 
#18 ·
In my opinion, there's some good stuff in here. I actually like it better than I thought I would.

1) No more Canadian content as a calculation of time. It's now a minimum 30% of gross revenue. Far better regime.
2) Mainstream news and sports programming (across the entire group) do not count towards the 30% Canadian content formula. Since this programming is successful and profitable, it's a good call by the CRTC not to allow it to be traded off against the formula at the expense of dramatic production, documentary programming, etc.
3) If a local station opts for VFS they lose all regulatory programming protection (mandatory distribution, priority channel placement, and simsubs).
4) Program deletion in exchange is fair especially since the BDU's will have the ability to negotiate compensation to avoid deletion.

Also worth noting that the CRTC may not have the legal authority to actually allow VFS. If the Federal Court finds that the Act does not allow for it, the whole thing winds up as a political decision. Something both Liberal and Conservative politicians don't want any piece of.
 
#19 ·
At least it's a short-term hostage situation (I think strong words like these are appropriate to send the right message to the Canadian networks and the CRTC). The CRTC is using it as a stop-gap (I don't know if I used that term correctly). So the gravy train can't last forever, thankfully.
 
#22 ·
Just heard the decision on CTVgm owned CKLW-AM. They said that this "could increase cable bills by $10 a mo" when BDU's pass the extra cost on to consumers. Here's to delaying the inevitable at great taxpayer expense.

There's now ZERO reason for broadcasters not to convert to digital OTA next year.
 
#23 ·
I will look forward to the day when a BDU yanks a Canadian network because they couldn't come to an agreement on compensation.

CTV: I think we're worth 75 cents per month.
Rogers: Uh... we'll give you 35.
CTV: 35?! We have American Idol. C'mon here!
Rogers: Okay. 49 cents.
CTV: 60.
Rogers: 60?! More like 53.
CTV No, 60.
Rogers: Nope.

*yanks the channel and turn on my TV to see a title card on CTV channel placement reads*: "Due to a conflict of negotiation for compensation, CTV is temporarily unavailable."

And then I watch ABC/CBS/NBC/Fox simsub-free (albeit temporarily). And they can't black out the American network each time they run a show CTV has the Canadian broadcast rights to.
 
#24 ·
windows7 -

I think you missed the whole point. If the cablecos/sat companies dont come to an agreement CTV/Global etc can not only pull their channels - they can require blackouts of any program they have rights to on any US channel. So no simsub free NBC/CBS etc..


Welcome to dealing with the crtc...
 
#25 ·
There's now ZERO reason for broadcasters not to convert to digital OTA next year.
In one of the sub-documents that is emphasized for all markets over 300,000, capital areas, plus Barrie and Hamilton, and markets under 300,000 where there is more than one local television station.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) previously determined that the transition must be completed by August 31, 2011. In today’s decision, the CRTC maintained this deadline for major Canadian markets as well as provincial and territorial capital cities.
 
#27 ·
The CRTC has always had too cozy of a relationship w/ Canadian networks. That has got to stop. I'd vote for a Prime Minister who would abolish the CRTC and form a new watchdog to deal w/ today's TV and media landscape. Young, brilliant minds. Instead of the inept old goats that currently get "envelopes full of money under a bathroom stall" analogy (not literally).
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top