Here’s a very quick round-up of reports on the CRTC’s ruling today on the issue of signal fees — though the ruling is not final, since the CRTC is leaving it up to the courts to determine the limits of its authority on this issue:
Here’s a very quick round-up of reports on the CRTC’s ruling today on the issue of signal fees — though the ruling is not final, since the CRTC is leaving it up to the courts to determine the limits of its authority on this issue:
– The Toronto Star’s summary of the ruling: “The federal regulatory agency released an important decision Monday supporting the principle of private broadcasters being able to obtain compensation for their on-air signals, which cable and satellite providers are currently able to get for free… [but] stayed away from imposing what had come to be called ‘fee for carriage’ – where cable companies pay networks a certain amount of money in exchange for the right to include their channels in their packages – by leaving it up to the market to decide what each signal is worth.”
– The Hollywood Reporter gives a U.S.-centric perspective (“the country’s TV watchdog on Monday opened the way for Canadians to be forced to pay to watch U.S. series-rich local TV signals”). Also, The Wall Street Journal has its own summary: “Instead of the regulator imposing a fee for carriage, broadcasters and cable and satellite operators are being left to determine the value of those signals.”
– Bill Brioux blogs his thoughts on the matter at TV Feeds My Family.
– On a related note, according to a new poll, apparently we’re now spending more time online than in front of regular TV sets, but just barely.