Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Broadcasters Seek New Internet Regulation
An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist's weekly Toronto Star column reports that the Canadian broadcasting community, including broadcasters, copyright collectives, and actor labor unions, are all calling on Canada's broadcast regulator to increase its regulation of the Internet. Some groups want sites such as YouTube to be subject to Canadian content requirements, while the broadcasters want to stop U.S. broadcasters from streaming television shows online into
Canada."
To satisfy the Canadian content requirement, all one needs to do is add a couple minutes of the 'Great White North' to each of the YouTube clips.
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
"Go fuck yourself."
It's one thing for American lobbies to push for government regulation of the internet, given our government can be bought, and we do still control the internet to a significant degree. Just what the hell do these guys think they can accomplish?
Any laws passed in deference to these idiots will have all the power of a UN resolution.
Dear Canadian Radio and Television Commision:
The internet is neither radio, nor television, nor Canadian, so keep your regulatory hands in your pockets.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Since the Canadian Air Force is equipped with those fantastic Avro Arrows, they'll have no problem enforcing this...
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
Like we need more swivel servants in Ottawa..
Regulating the internet is like trying to regulate the weather.
Fools.. (and my tax dollars would have to pay for this crap) /canuck
I'm not anti-social, I'm anti-idiot.
Somehow I see this as one more huge step towards a boom in anonymous web surfing.
Only by lowering ourselves to their level will we ever be fairly represented on YouTube.
Life needs more saving throws.
Sounds like a request from Scott
[Insert pithy quote here]
Canada loves to talk and explore ideas and treats all ideas equal regardless of merit. They are trying to push Canadian content on anything broadcast in Canada. What is a broadcast? How do they know what is Canadian. If I video my wacky in-laws in Vancouver and put it on say, Youtube.ca, that is Canadian content at it best. Laughs, its impossible to govern and tell what is digitally created in Canada
Canada has the CBC for Canadian content and very few Canadians watch it. It is so bad, it is embarrassing to watch.
From TFA, the CAB fears that U.S. broadcasters will simply stream their programming into Canada
Except whenever I try to stream something from a U.S. network I get a message like "Not available in your region". There's no advantage for a U.S network to stream to Canada because the streamed ads are intended for a U.S. market. My guess is that the advertisers pay/view and they don't want to pay for Canadian eyes.
And, FWIW, as a Canadian, when I went to abc.com to view the episode of "Lost" I had missed, I was told that I was ineligible to view it, as I was accessing the site from Canada. So at a technical level, it looks like it is feasible to block Canadians, and as I noted above, it's not an issue of Canadian broadcasters producing quality shows or not; it's an issue of them protecting the rights that they have paid for.
What was once true, is no longer so
This will go over about as well as the McKenzie Brothers' attempt to get free beer from the liquor store. :)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KWzdOKCb-Gw
Sugapablo
Canada needs to friggen grow up.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
As a Canadian, these kinds of stories are very disturbing. It's not so much that I'm worried about these laws actually passing as I'm worried about the socio-political ideology in which these ideas are born. On the one hand are profit driven enterprises trying to protect their markets, which is nothing new and quite expected. But on the other hand in the ministries is a virulent strain of "we have the right to decide how much of what Canadian viewers get to see in the name of protecting 'Canadian culture'." THEY WANT TO DECIDE WHAT MEDIA I HAVE ACCESS TO. This is just as reprehensible as the Catholic church burning pagan classical writings, without even the excuse that it's for a divine purpose.
Rip those fucking fascists. Kein Mehrheit Für Die Mitleid!!!! Berzerker!!!
Wait a second...
"The Canadian broadcasting community, including broadcasters, copyright collectives, and actor labor unions, are all calling on Canada's broadcast regulator to increase its regulation of the Internet."
Well, of course they are. The American broadcasting community wants increased regulation of the Internet, too. Heck, the Tongan broadcasting community probably wants it too. We should keep an eye on them, but don't blame Canada for having greedy broadcasters.
Canada is slowly becoming the North American equivalent of Britain and France combined in the some of the worst ways - Legislated to death and it rewards its citizens for 'waiting for the government to do something about it.' At least they shave their pits (Or so I believe)
I've heard a number of Canadian artists say that the CRTC, the gov, and particularly the cancon rules, have saved Canadian culture and the Canadian artists. So, if what they are asking for could be done then that would be great.
But it can't.
for Canada, then, just work up software at YouTube that puts toques and beers on everybody in those videos when the IP request comes from up north, eh.
it worked for SCTV, eh.
so then should shortwave radios in Quebec have translation software so all the stations you listen to come in speaking French? it would be funny to hear Nutjob of Iran on the news, eh, speaking in French. "Death to America. Get me another beer, eh?"
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Har?
>they can mandate a firewall that blocks all objectionable content from getting into Canada.
Having watched Canadian television, I, for one, find the concept of watching television content that Canadian broadcasters find objectionable terrifying.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
This isn't canada, it's government or the CRTC. It's labour unions and other dumb asses that think they can get some more money.
----------------------------
Esobofh - Currently drinking fresh mango juice.
I'm Canadian and I don't remember requesting nor mandating anyone in our government to make any changes at all to the Internet.
This sounds like another MPAA RIAA or other mafiAA tactic to try to strip our freedom.
Take off, eh, you hosers!
Leave my Internet alone!
It's unreasonable because all of these artificial boundaries are bullshit. The internet is a challenge to the established order because the only boundaries it recognizes are those between networks. On the internet we are all peers. Anyone can produce and distribute content. As you may have noticed, this terrifies the entrenched media conglomerates.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
There's finally a use for the Evil Bit.
If Canadian broadcasters want Canadians to see Canadian content on youtube, they should put some awesome videos on youtube and then promote them to people. THAT'S how you encourage the development and advancement of culture. By making things that kick ass and then spreading them far and wide, not by keeping out things that happen to kick asses of the wrong nationality. Maybe if they'd get past their intense penis-envy towards American-style copyright law, they would see that.
Of course the CRTC isn't saying we (Canadians) can't watch certain things. But this is certainly giving the feeling of censorship, by trying to impose what we can view...wait...that is censorship! Here's a thought: Disband the CRTC and realize that most Canadian programming isn't worth saving if it needs to be propped up by subsidies.
--
Luck is just skill you didn't know you had.
Yea.
If you cant compete, quit the field and go do another business.
people are not bound to be LIMITED in their freedoms using the taxes they THEMSELVES are paying, for the sake of any sector's personal profit and protection.
fucking bastards.
Read radical news here
You can't take the sky from me...
The rights to distribute via broadcast and via videotape are different rights. Why should the right to distribute via the internet not also be a distinct right?
The solution to this problem is not a law. It's litigation between the corporations in question. Rather than filtering, which attacks valid content as well, the solution is to account for it in your contracts.
If I wanted to force people to carry something from point A to point B by hand I wouldn't stipulate that they were not permitted not to distribute it by train, automobile, or jet pack, because someone might invent teleportation. I'd stipulate that it must be carried by hand. What's so complex about this concept?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
is protection from American hegemony on teh Intarwebs.
Since most Canadians don't know much about what their country stands for, or it's history beyond the lessons gleened from beer commercial slogans, many peer south for queues about what it is to be Canadian. And what is it, in a nutshell? I am *not* American.
Yes, having your national identity centered around something you're not may be difficult for most Americans to understand, but perhaps I can put it in context for you: Not being American generates nationalistic feelings among Canadians akin to the way that being Republican, embracing democracy, Capitalism or the right to bear arms resonates with some Americans.
The broadcasters know this sentiment is strong among a sizable chunk of the Canadian populace, and they're not above using it as a tool to convince the CRTC to protect them from the big bad wolf even when it's clearly absurd to think that a Canadian government entity can in any way regulate or control information on the Internet.
Though I must admit, it'll be fun to watch them try!
Sometimes i rush to post and miss the obvious stuff.
I remember a few years back when the CRTC came to the conclusion that the internet could _not_ be regulated. Thus it didn't try. Now, apparently it has decided it can. IMO, the change in government isn't a coincidence.
But, I have an idea for all the arrogant americans that have posted in this thread. Instead of being assholes (ignoring your own backyard btw), how about just sitting back and being amused when they try. I mean, there's nothing wrong with being critical, but seriously *disappointed*
Vote 'yes' to join with China by installing firewalls at the border so that we can protect your children from nasty American home made videos on Youtube.
Vote 'no' to maintain a free society, but allow evil American culture to seep into the brains of your children. Oh why won't you think of the children!
still a Typical Canuck response.. "oh our shitty content can't cut it so we better regulate it to death".
The sad part is we're putting out some great stuff lately. Corner Gas, Trailer Park Boys, Kenny vs. Spenny...
And the sad part is I too thought it was an April fools headline too... How can we be so daft to think we can regulate a site out of our country?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
The arguments from broadcasters and media conglomerates regarding the importance of "Canadian content" is nothing more than a smokescreen for "make them buy my shit or more of my shit." There is plenty of Canadian content on the Internet; possibly disproportionately so given that Canada is an extremely wired country. The problem for the broadcasters is that it isn't the property of Bell/Globemedia/whoever so they can't charge for it.
Actual advocates for Canadian content, such as Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, are really nothing more than cultural elistists who think "our stuff" should be valued more highly than "their stuff", meaning gauche and pedestrian American television and right wing radio. If it was up to these people we would all wear smoking jackets and sit around talking about feminist politics, Leonard Cohen and Margaret Atwood all day.
I love my country, but we often throw money at a problem rather than common sense. What I suspect will happen is that everyone will realize that not only is it technically impossible and politically unpopular, but likely unconstitutional to attempt to enforce Canadian content on the Internet. So, the government of the day will simply add a Canadian cultural tax to our Internet bills, spread the money around and call the problem solved. Which makes the fact that we just spent millions, even billions of dollars to connect schools and communities to a world wide network information network called the Internet look stupid. We could have simply sat the children down and turned on the CBC.
Tell me again how great Canada is? I tend to forget when I read of moves like this. I don't recall USA broadcasters stopping the streaming of Canadian television shows down to their southern neighbor.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
The boundaries that keep people from walking in your front door and eating your food from your refrigerator before changing into your clothes and walking out of your home with your laptop computer are also artificial.
Hmmm. Wonder if you think those artifical boundaries are also bullshit.
Sure the Internet is turning things on their heads. That's why legal types are still debating what to do about it. Did you think someone was going to give up a few million dollars in broadcast rights because while you think rights to your property should be protected, their property rights are bullshit?
For those who aren't familiar with the context around these kind of issues in Canada, here's a quick primer:
In Canada, TV and Radio broadcasts are required by law to feature 30-40% "Canadian content", the nature of which is determined by some reasonably complex rules. In addition, there are heavy subsidies to broadcasters, production companiesm, artists and the like to produce domestic and foreign broadcasting in the country.
However, the media Canadians overwhelmingly prefer to consume is American. Apart from newscasts and some sports, Canadian prime time television lineups and radio playlists are overwhelmingly dominated by American content. In order to meet the Canadian content requirements, dead zones like Saturday nights are filled with mediocre Canadian lawyer and detective shows that have no discernable audience or quality.
The Internet has effectively sidestepped these regulations, and if Canadians can just tune in to their favourite shows on the sites of American broadcasters, or on YouTube, they ruin the major revenue stream of the big Canadian broadcasters, and sidestep the forced exposure of Canadian content (which few watch or listen to anyway).
This situation has led to a strange, unholy alliance of big media companies like Bell Globemedia, left-wing "nationalists" like the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting who are trying to combat "American Cultural Imperialism", and the various actors unions, who benefit greatly from the flood of tax dollars into Canadian productions.
This sad mix of financial self-interest and anti-American nationalism probably won't result in a special 30% Canadian YouTube or anything, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a tax on internet connections that will be put to a program development fund that will further line the pockets of big media companies and the big media unions.
Not all of them. Some of those boundaries are physical. Like the wall, and the door.
And by the way, the only artificial boundary that ACTUALLY keeps that from happening is me, with a gun. The cops aren't there to protect you. They're there to punish people.
My point is that no new legislation is required. Just make sure that your contracts are correctly written. That's what those lawyers are paid for, yes?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
life is balance.
the balance of the free market vs the government is exploitatively in favor of the corporations. this should not be the case.
Read radical news here
The solution to this problem is not a law. It's litigation between the corporations in question.
Hey, I'm not saying I support them, I'm just saying that there's a logic to it.Frankly, I find the whole idea of distribution rights evil. It leads to a local channel airing Babylon 5 at 12:05am, or delays in airing, and other assorted shenanigans. But since they made a deal for TV rights, if the TV show is distributed to their customers in the same timeframe by another means, then they are getting screwed, so I see why they're pushing for a law to unscrew them.
The telecom companies still don't get the net. They still think that a screen is a screen, it's the same cable plugging into it, it should work the same way.
You can't take the sky from me...
"blamecanada" tag? WTF for? What nation does this effect except Canada? Has the Canadian Government ruled on something? No, some greedy, private entities are trying to change something. /. needs tag moderators or they'll be completely freakin useless.
Now the Internet is the new "ocean" and the media broadcasters are the new "caravelles". When high quality content is created and exchanged, all parties involved can find a benefit in the process. As the author of that article pointed out, "...Internet streaming and new media create incentives for more Canadian productions since profitability in the emerging environment will depend upon original content that can be distributed across all platforms, old and new... If Canadian broadcasters are unable to rely on cheap U.S. programming, they will be forced to compete by investing in their own original content. This will dramatically alter Canadian content production from one mandated by government regulation to one mandated by market survival."
In this age of the new "caravelle" it is content creation that can boost commerce, rather than traffic regulation.
Make Canadian content that people want to watch or listen to. I'm a Canadian, and frankly this stinks of protectionism no better than the issues with the US gambling industry/online-gambling issue and many others.
Why should Canadian content providers be able to block outside competitors? Isn't that part of free trade? If somebody wants to sell me programming on cable, satellite, or internet... then it seems to qualify is "trade" to me.
You can't take the sky from me...
LOL!!! He was talking about BS boundries which peopel are trying to impose on the INTERNET. Some people.... Must be a Canadian. :P
As a Canadian, this pisses me off. The CRTC already has their regulatory hands into our TV, Radio and other publishing mediums to the point where its nigh impossible to get any substantial international content anywhere. The only world news I can get on a regular basis is by listening to the college radio station at 7am to hear snippets of the BBC news. If Canadian content was actually good it would get air time. Infact, there are TON's of amazing indie band's filling this quota on my local alternative station, because their actualy worth listening too (not like Nickleback, god knows why they get played). Forcing content does nothing but bring the overall quality of our media down, and force canadians to find other ways of obtaining what we really want to see and hear - like downloads, satellite radio and pirate satellite tv signals (yay!). Fuck You CRTC! -your humble canadian.
Wherever i go, There i am.
I've given up trying to coach them:
"Do you get paid by the call or the hour?"
"Uh, the call."
"Well, having said that I'm not interested, you persist in continuing to sell to me, an uninterested customer. The longer you talk to me, the more money you lose. The smartest thing you can do financially is to tell me to have a good night, hang up, and try the next person on the list."
"Have a good night, sir."
I had a telemarketer call the other night. He was selling travel insurance.
"It's not legal for me to travel outside of BC or Canada right now."
"What about dependent children?"
"My oldest is a toddler. That would be illegal too."
"How about a spouse?"
"My attorney has advised me not to answer any questions regarding my spouse."
"You, uh... Have a good night, sir."
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Groups like the CRTC can't adapt fast enough to new technologies and actually hold back the people they want to protect.
Some people are dumb, particularly Americans who don't understand the meaning of the word liberal. The origin of the word liberal derives from the British Liberal party who when it first adopted the name in the 19th century when they stood for free-trade and unbridled capitalism as opposed to the Tories or conservatives as they are also called who stood for tariffs and government regulation to keep grain prices high to benefit agricultural landowners.
Nowadays liberal by and large means a neo-con in sheep's clothing. Personally I think all professional politicians whether they are described as liberal or conservatives should be hung up from the nearest lamppost by their balls (I guess we will have to think of a different part of their anatomy for Hilary and Condi, but then again maybe not).
Back to the article, professor Geist argues that unregulated new media on the Internet will increase Canadian content available rather than reduce it. This is opposed to the arguments put forward by the big Canadian media corporations and other special interest groups who are using it as an excuse to to try and grab hold of new revenue streams. Two opposed sides whose positions have nothing to do with the much misused word "liberal". Here in Canada we have a big L Liberal Party who in government turns onto craven conservatives but in opposition (like now) shift rapidly to the left (though not with out the odd bit of "law and order waffle" so as not to alienate the rednecks) to prevent being outflanked by the New Democrats and the Greens. They are all corrupt and bought and sold by the corporations like pork-belly futures, just as in the U.S.
Call the Royal Canadian Kilted Yaksmen on them. http://www.retrojunk.com/details_commercial/670/
In my limited experience, that has happened. abc.com won't let me, a Canadian, download shows that their Canadian partners have paid for. I haven't tried it with cbs or nbc or fox, so I don't know if the same holds for them, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did. But I can understand why CTV or Global would be pissed if someone posted an entire episode of say, CSI, on youtube that CTV had paid the Canadian rights for, just as I'm sure CBS would be mightily pissed off in the US.
And there is a market for these shows, even after they've aired originally. For example, I enjoy both "24" and "Prison Break", but with them going on hiatus frequently, changing air times, etc., I've lost track with both current seasons. So I'm waiting for them to come out on DVD, so I can watch the entire season at once - and I'll pay for the privilege of seeing it without commercials. Now if all those episodes were available on youtube (or via torrents), it's pretty clear that the value of the franchise is diminished.
Now, I think the compromise on recorded music in Canada makes some sense; we pay a premium for rip media, and that is used to compensate artists (and the record companies, of course) in return for allowing us to download music, and basically use our music collections as we see fit. But there currently is no such compromise for TV shows, and I can understand why broadcasters are concerned.
What was once true, is no longer so
Tell that to the softwood lumber producers and your government ignoring WTO arbitration.
Tell that to any skilled professional trying to work cross border.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
..don't panic
In reality CRTC == Commission for Repression and Thought Control
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
The CBC definitely represents the right way for a government to stimulate the arts. The CRTC represents the wrong way. The CBC actually produces some great programs, and broadcasts some awesome music. "Brave New Waves" anyone? That show was one of the best things to ever grace the radiowaves.