Broadcasters rights agency needs more information before responding to JumpTV

The main copyright collective representing Canadian broadcasters is having a tough time responding to JumpTV.com’s request for a new Internet tariff, saying it’s still unclear what the new company is planning to launch. The Canadian Broadcasters Rights Agency Inc (CBRA) and other groups have until October 20 to file their comments with the Copyright Board on JumpTV’s proposal for an Internet-specific retransmission tariff. The chair of the CBRA says it’s been frustrating drafting a comprehensive response to the idea because there is little information – other than informal conversations and rumours – on what exactly it is that JumpTV is planning to deliver. "We don’t know exactly who they are or what they’re planning on doing until we actually see their signals or see what their proposal is," says Grant Buchanan, who has taken on additional responsibilities at the CBRA following the death this year of the CBRA’s executive director Tony Scapillati. The CBRA is one of several copyright collectives that would receive royalty payments from web broadcasters if a new Internet copyright tariff is established. "It’s an unusual application where someone comes in asking the board to set an interim tariff for an operation which is not in existence and all you have is various conversations with (JumpTV CEO) Mr. (Farrel) Miller and others and hints and suggestions about what is actually going to transpire," says Buchanan. JumpTV’s success before the Copyright Board will likely hinge on the infamous Section 31 of the Copyright Act which defines re-transmitters. It’s a definition that has historically been used by cable TV companies. Asked whether it would make sense to have an Internet-specific tariff on re-transmission as JumpTV has requested, Buchanan says that would depend on whether the company qualified for shelter under Section 31 of the legislation. If they do, then he says a new tariff would likely have to be established, and that could take time. "Even if you wanted to go towards a tariff, how would you set it? I mean, you don’t even get there. You have to know an awful lot more before you can even consider accommodating the request." Industry watchers will be keeping a close eye on the Copyright Board as it decides whether a new Internet tariff will be set, and if it does, whether JumpTV would fall under such a definition. According to a July 1 Canada Gazette supplement to the Copyright Act, a retransmitter "includes a person who operates a cable re-transmission system (including a master antenna system) an LPTV , an MDS or a direct-to-home satellite system (DTH system)." The definition, however, doesn’t preclude organizations which fall outside those categories. Section 31 of the Act itself broadly states that re-transmission can take place by "tele-communication". In drafting the CBRA’s response to JumpTV’s request, Buchanan (a former VP of regulatory affairs for WIC Connexus, a licensed wireless company) will likely confer with new colleague Peter Grant, counsel at McCarthy Tétrault. Buchanan joined the firm September 1. Grant was the broadcasting community’s lead counsel against iCraveTV.com’s similar venture, shut down by the American broadcasting community last winter (CNM, Dec. 23/00).

Broadcasters rights agency needs more information before responding to JumpTV

News | 10/18/2000 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us