2015-86 Let's Talk TV
The way forward – Creating compelling and diverse Canadian programming
Broadcasting notice of consultation:
2015-87 Call for comments on proposed amendments to the exemption order for video-on-demand undertakings and to the standard conditions of licence for video-on-demand undertakings
Broadcasting order:
2015-88 Exemption order respecting discretionary television programming undertakings serving fewer than 200,000 subscribe
Shomi is currently not available to all Internet subscribers. It is available to Rogers and Shaw ones. I haven't heard anything about their plans for the future, so unless you have, that's speculation. As for what Bell's terms are, that's also speculation on your part. Given that Bell does have Rogers and Shaw onboard with their channel sign-ins (like CTV.ca), it's safe to say they can agree to terms on these things.
There are also many things in these new rules that don't necessarily directly benefit Bell and Rogers. Removal of genre protection is a fairly big one.
Not currently but I believe the initial announcement stated it will be made available to all internet users once testing is completed in 2015. Another difference is that Shomi is also available to Rogers and Shaw internet only subscribers, not just their TV subscribers. The current status of Shomi is still in beta testing. I believe that ends May 31. That could change, of course.
I don't think shomi ever gave an exact date when the beta would end. Here is a quote that appears at the end of recent shomi press releases - it sounds like you will only be able to get shomi if you sign up for TV or internet through one of their partner BDUs.
shomi is available now in beta first to Rogers and Shaw Internet or cable customers, while conversations continue with other BDUs.
My understanding is that it's not available on Shaw satellite receivers but it is available over the internet. Shomi is available to Rogers subscribers on their cable TV boxes and internet. It's currently free to Rogers TV subscribers and with some top level internet plans.
Correct, it is not available on ShawDirect receivers (and I don't think it ever will be in the foreseeable). But Shaw's ShawDirect TV only customers are not (yet?) being given online access either. Hope that clarifies what I was trying to say.
That means Shaw Direct is behind other major service providers yet again. Bell is reported to be making CraveTV available on both satellite and Fibe receivers. Rogers has it on their cable receivers. There is no reason why Shaw Direct could not make Shomi available on their receivers, apart from the obvious task of doing the firmware development.
The Commission has separate rules for video-on-demand services available to cable and satellite subscribers and online video services. In the case of video-on-demand, these services must invest in Canadian productions and include these programs in their libraries, among other requirements. They are also not allowed to offer exclusive programs, since not all Canadians would be able to access them. Online video services, on the other hand, are exempt from these requirements.
The CRTC is introducing an important change to ensure Canadian video-on-demand services can compete on an equal footing with online video services. Canadian video-on-demand services will be able to offer exclusive content as long as they are available to all Canadians over the Internet. This means that Canadians would not need to have a cable or satellite subscription in order to access these services.
It sounds like if CraveTV and Shomi offer their services through the set-top boxes, they will be considered "Video-on-Demand" services, forced to invest in Canadian productions, and prevented from offering exclusive services unless they offered it to all Canadians [for a fee, of course].
On the other hand, if they offered their services as "Online Video Services", they would be exempt from such regulations. From the sound of things, this means that an Online Video Service offered by Bell or Shaw/Rogers would be able to offer exclusive content, and would not have to offer their services to all Canadians (they could restrict it to one or two BDUs). The "Online Video Services" category also seems to encompass Netflix.
Given these alternatives, the services are likely to be classified as Online Video Services, and continue to be restricted to customers of specific television services.
Is this a correct understanding of the press release, or am I missing something?
There are also many things in these new rules that don't necessarily directly benefit Bell and Rogers. Removal of genre protection is a fairly big one.
I actually disagree here. These rules actually benefit Rogers and Bell because they have several weak specialty channels that are bound to onerous programming requirements. These restrictions are now gone so channels like MuchMusic can finally morph into a specialty channel that is viable in 2015. As for Rogers, they can now use G4 and Bio for more popular brands and programming. The one company that might stand to lose on this is Shaw Media due to the fact that they have the majority of the most popular specialty channels in Canada. If Bell and Rogers can make some of their weak specialty channels ratings winners, that will surely eat away at Shaw Media's bottom line.
The quote in post #36 is how I originally understood the CRTC wanted VOD and streaming services to operate. Bell's press release makes it look like they want to operate CraveTV in a completely different manner. Once again, Bell seems to think it's exempt from regulations set out by the CRTC. It will be interesting to see what happens. Meanwhile, Canadians won't get what they want.
The problem with all a lot of Canadian companies (not just broadcasters) is that they are not forward thinking enough to anticipate changes to the marketplace several years down the road. I for example subscribe to US Netflix and Hulu. Even if something as comparable becomes available in a few years from now, why should I as a consumer suddenly support the Canadian version? American broadcasters clearly see the value in providing services like Netflix, Hulu, CBS, HBO etc. If Canadian broadcasters are to stupid to see this, then they are going to be in for a world of pain in a few years from now when a good chunk of the population is getting it's programming by other means.
They can lobby the CRTC and government to make rules but at the end of the day, it's extremely difficult to fully regulate the Internet. Now is the time to create services that will keep consumers purchasing in Canada rather than going to the US.
It is a very nice idea, but will those $8 services invest in new infrastructure like fiber network or other projects that canadian business are undertaking.
^^^ Except that Bell is also encouraging customers to subscribe to the competitors services in order to be able to subscribe to theirs. Bell would make very little if I subscribed to basic with Shaw to be able to get CraveTV, but would make more if they would sell me CraveTV as a standalone for the same price as Netflix and Shomi.
^ I'm sure a portion of the $85/month I'm paying for internet is going to fund any network upgrades Shaw is currently undertaking.
On the other hand, Bell operates in a protected, regulated environment and receives significant benefits from that environment. The rules that apply to an open and regulated markets are different. Given the limited number of players in the Canadian broadcasting industry and the lack of true competition, a certain amount of public responsibility is required. If Bell wants to give up their exclusive rights to HBO, Showcase and other exclusive content and them compete for Canadian customers directly then I'd say let Bell do what they want to with their streaming service.
I agree that forced bundling of exclusive content should be prohibited. A streaming service that has any exclusive content should be available as a standalone service to any Canadian with an internet connection. Voluntary bundling discounts are OK, but there may be a need for some pricing rules - perhaps a maximum bundle discount so Bell can't offer CraveTV as a standalone for 10 times the bundled price and claim they are following the rules.
It seems many here are taking 'exclusive' to mean exclusive rights to programming. But reading other posts and articles, it seems that the CRTC is using 'exclusive' to mean exclusive to one BDU.
Can anyone clarify this so that when we discuss the issue of VOD services and exclusivity ae are all using the same meaning of 'exclusive'?
Appendix 2 to Broadcasting Notice of Consultation CRTC 2015-87
Proposed amendment to the standard conditions of licence, expectations and encouragement for video-on-demand undertakings
Conditions of licence
10. The licensee shall not acquire exclusive rights for any of the programming offered on its programming service.
Their ruling addresses both things. Essentially, they're saying that if they have exclusive programming, they can't make it exclusive to one BDU.
For example, a made-for-TV program cannot be offered exclusively by a service such as Global Go if it can only be accessed through the Shaw Internet service platform. However, it could be offered exclusively by Global Go if the program can be accessed through other Internet service providers in Canada. Exclusives are also permitted for exempt undertakings when content has been made specifically for mobile or online consumption, whether or not the service is linked to the subscription of a particular mobile or Internet service provider.
It says to all canadians without authentication to any BDU service. So no TV subscription should be required if VOD service will contain content with exclusive rights.
Specifically, the Commission announced that it would amend and expand the VOD exemption order to include these new hybrid VOD services as a second type of exempt undertaking. These services will benefit from the following incentives:
the ability to offer exclusive programming content in the same manner as services operating under the DMEO; and
the ability to offer their service on a closed BDU network in the same manner as traditional VOD services without the regulatory requirements relating to financial contributions to and shelf space for Canadian programming that would normally be imposed on those traditional VOD services.
However, to be eligible for exemption under the expanded order, the services must also be offered on the Internet to all Canadians without authentication to a BDU subscription.
I stand partially corrected as it does say that. However, that is specifically for the new Hybrid category they've created which exempts them from financial obligations to the broadcasting system. There was a quote from a CraveTV spokesperson in an earlier post saying that they are a licensed VOD service and do make their financial contributions as required under the original VOD category. Thus, they aren't using the new Hybrid category, and that doesn't apply to them.
Their online service would fall under the CRTC's Digital Media Exemption Order. Here's what they say about that:
In the DMEO, the Commission applied a somewhat different approach to exclusive content related to how the content is accessed. Specifically, the DMEO prohibits services from providing exclusive access to programming designed primarily for television where access to such programming is restricted based on a consumer’s subscription to a specific mobile or Internet service provider. Exclusive content is therefore permitted provided that it can be accessed by subscribers of more than one mobile or Internet service provider.
Given that they explicitly allow it being tied to mobile or ISP subscriptions as long as it's more than one of them, I would imagine that they're going to be okay with it being tied to TV subscriptions as well even if they don't specifically address that situation.
Edit: Also, they're still seeking comment on the final wording of the new regulations, so you can bet that this will be addressed there.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
1.7M posts
114.9K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to Canadian TV, computing and home theatre owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, displays, troubleshooting, styles, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!