A computer programmer’s perspective on retransmission

Following are some of the comments of University of Waterloo PhD student Matthew Skala to the ongoing CRTC process examining Internet retransmission (PN 2002-38). Skala came to international attention when he and a colleague reverse-engineered the censorware program Cyber Patrol in 1999. 20. The CRTC has very little authority over Internet retransmission because of the non-scarcity of Internet bandwidth. In a democratic society that values freedom of expression, it is hard to tolerate any regulation on communication. Canadians permit the CRTC to exist at all (albeit often under considerable protest!) because the radio spectrum is a limited shared resource. In order to make sure that that resource is used in a way that benefits everyone, we have the CRTC to regulate broadcasting. The CRTC’s mandate to regulate cable transmission is less solidly supported, but could be justified on the grounds that cable capacity is still a scarce resource, still often a monopoly in many areas, and still part of the same system as over-the-air television. But in the Internet realm, the CRTC’s mandate is questionable at best. The Internet could be called the ultimate in "public access": there is no limit to how many broadcasters or retransmitters can operate without interference, and no call to apportion a scarce shared resource. Accordingly, the CRTC had best enter any Internet-related process in a spirit of humility. 21. Because bandwidth, although not scarce, is expensive, it is therefore difficult to imagine a business model that could make Internet retransmission profitable at all. I am of course aware of the iCraveTV and JumpTV efforts which no doubt sparked the present consultation process; but between the beginning of those efforts and now, the Internet economy has changed, bandwidth (once predicted to become cheap "Really Soon Now") has remained expensive, and viewers are no longer willing to watch low-quality television on their computers just because it’s "cool". I do not believe that Internet retransmission can be profitable anyway. It certainly cannot be profitable soon; and if it ever will be profitable, it must carry an absolute minimum of regulatory load. 22. ...If the CRTC wants Internet retransmission to be possible at all, it must allow retransmitters to do whatever they think necessary to turn a profit. The alleged "right" of copyright holders to prevent mutilation of programming only extends as far as the programming itself; showing the program in a window that also contains an advertisement does not violate copyright in any way. It would be appropriate to require that any advertising added by retransmitters be outside, and clearly not part of, the program; that is the maximum limit I see as defensible under copyright law or tenable in a business sense...Conclusion 26. Any regulatory regime for Internet retransmission must face the fundamental technical issues affecting this technology. Transmission capacity on the Internet is not scarce; so the CRTC is not on solid ground to make extensive rules. Transmission capacity, although readily available, is expensive; so any regulation of retransmission must permit retransmitters the widest possible scope for recovering their costs through banner advertising and any other means they can devise, lest "regulation" become prohibition in disguise. It is not appropriate to require that the original quality of the signal be preserved in Internet retransmission, because few if any viewers could actually receive original-quality signals over the Internet. It is inappropriate, and impossible, to require any geographic limitations; at the very most, we might demand that the "first hop" be limited to viewers in Canada according to IP address. It is impossible to prevent recording, copying, or sharing of retransmitted content; and inappropriate to try. Because the CRTC’s authority over the Internet is questionable at best, it is necessary to proceed in a spirit of humility.

A computer programmer’s perspective on retransmission

News | 10/03/2002 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