Category: Government

Ofcom R18 Ban: Comment

Ofcom R18 Ban: OpinionFollowing Ofcom publishing its new broadcasting code earlier this week, Russ Taylor of ofcomwatch outlines his reasons for disliking the R18 ban. He makes good points about the difference between IP delivered content and that which is broadcast. Simon

I’m going to stop banging-on about the Ofcom R18 ban (eventually), but I thought I would share a few thoughts about the decision:

1. The reaction to the R18 ban (or lack of reaction) says alot about the British system of content regulation. The decision–from an economic standpoint–is a significant and highly intrusive market intervention by Ofcom that creates winners (licensed sex shops, internet porn sites, future IPTV players) and losers (cable and Sky). Adult content flows through the UK. Ofcom’s decision has not stopped that flow–it has redirected the flow. So, while I use the term ‘ban’, that doesn’t quite capture the economic reality of what happened as a result of Ofcom’s decision.

2. The decision also has a social impact: There was straight, uncritical reporting of the ban in the trade press. Privately, some people have told me that they thought the Ofcom research was shoddy. In fact, one former content regulator told me he was ‘angry’ with the decision. But, there seems to be a general intellectual consensus that there is a difference between ‘freedom of expression’, championed by British academia and the likes of the Guardian, and ‘porn-campaigning’ which is some lower form of freedom.

3. Ofcom’s reputation was going to be damaged no matter what it did on this issue. If the regulator permitted R18 content, there would have been a firestorm. If the regulator banned it, the flimsy reasoning used for the ban would be attacked. One decision (a lift of the ban) would have been evidence-based, the contrary decision (maintaining the ban) would have been political. Ofcom is a utility-maximiser and went with the route with the least amount of pain. That’s how I see it. I’m willing to be convinced otherwise – by Ofcom or others… so feel free to write us and share an alternative opinion.

4. Speaking of flimsy reasoning, the ‘PIN protection’ argument advanced by Ofcom has been universally castigated–by those willing to speak out–as weak and illogical. Of course it is. Many adult activities, such as driving, voting and the viewing of adult content, are restricted to minors, and those restrictions are sometimes porous. Underage minors have always done things that they are not supposed to. That possibility, however, has never been used to restrict the freedom of adults. Until now.

5. In any case, minors will still access R18 over the internet or by raiding their parents DVD collection. God forbid, they will probably also create their own R18 content! So, the regulation is mostly ineffective. The regulation is also not platform or technology neutral. I suspect Ofcom will be successfully challenged on this extremely weak (and non-converged) justification for its decision. But going back to my point no. 3, above, it is a better political route for Ofcom to have a judge tell them the ban cannot stand. It is also a better political route for Ofcom to maintain a ban that is ineffective.

6. I’m concerned that the LSE research on R18 harms and the YORG research on PIN protection were held and not released until the day that the code was released. Matt Peacock of Ofcom previously posted on OfcomWatch and stridently indicated that Ofcom does not tactically time the release of documents. But I was told by LSE that there research was completed in early March. Why was it not made available to the public until May 25th — too late to attack the flimsy reasoning behind the R18 ban? Perhaps Ofcom can shed light on this.

Russ Taylor is a co-founder of ofcomwatch.

Broadcast Flag Knocked Back By US Court

Today, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled that the US FCC (Federal Communications Commission) does not have authority to prohibit companies from making computer and video hardware that doesn’t comply with the Broadcast Flag. This was to come into effect on 1 July, this year.

As far back as 2002, representations were made to the FCC by the content industry to restrict the use video content on US Digital TV sets, as the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group, as it was named then, crossed the line“.

Despite having had some notice on this, today’s ruling will be a shock for content owners.

We spoke to John Enser, Partner in Media and Communications at Olswang, “It isn’t the first time that the FCC have had one of their decisions overturned. There are usually two type of ruling; a firm no, or a softer ‘you haven’t done it right this time, but there may be ways it can be done.’ This at first glance, this looks like a firm no.”

We equated it to either a door being slammed, or it being politely pushed closed, but left ajar. It appear as if it’s the big slam.

Is this the end of the road for the Broadcast Flag? Probably not thinks John Enser, “They can either appeal, or they could go back to Congress to give them the powers.” We’d imagine it’s probably more likely Congressmen will be getting phone calls today as content owners are fierce lobbyists in Washington. When we put this to Cory Doctorow, European outreach officer of the EFF he felt it was less likely, “The only option open to Hollywood is to find a senator so suicidal that they are prepared to force a law that will break their delegates television sets.”

Ren Bucholz, EFF Policy Co-ordinator, America told us that the EFF were “shocked and delighted” by the ruling. In particularly “by the pro-public interest language used” and “unanimity of all three judges voting the same way.” He went on to wonder what it meant to the future of the FCC, “possibly leading to a trimming of their wings.”

A number of calls to the MPAA were not returned before publication.

As to what will happen to all of the TV and computer equipment that has been manufactured in readiness for 1 July is unclear, as is whether the FCC will be compelled to rebate the manufacturers of the effected equipment.

We’ll leave the closing words to Cory Doctorow, “Now the Broadcast Flag is dead, it is essential that the content industry doesn’t introduce the same restrictions into Europe, via the back door of the DVB specification.”

Court ruling FCC

(photo credit: Electronic Frontier Foundation)

IF… TV Goes Down The Tube – The Media 2016

I was asked to be lead technical advisor to a TV show, that was originally called IF … Media 2012. Over the last six months of script alterations and shooting the direction has changed, but finally the docu-drama is airing at 11:20pm BBC2.

It’s part of the highly respected BBC’s IF … series and it examines where TV may go in the next seven years. The piece is designed to give you some further background.

There’s little doubt that the media is changing significantly … and we haven’t even reached 2012.

Computers turned office life upside down. Now they’re focused on changing entertainment.

Each stage of the process – creation, distribution, and consumption is being altered, apparently inextricably leading us to the realisation of the long-held digital mantra (repeat after me) – What You Want, When You Want, Where You Want or WYW3 as it’s may become known as.

For those of you who haven’t downloaded and faithfully listened to the podcast of this chant on your media player, let me clarify – you will be able to access/consume any piece of media (text/audio/video/etc), on what ever device you have handy, no matter where you are.

Sadly the dream starts to falls apart at this point, because your commercial music or videos will only play on equipment approved by the owner of the content (more on that later).

Change is Afoot – High Definition

The Consumer Electronics companies have been spending a huge amount of effort promoting High Definition TV (HDTV) around the content production industries. They’re telling everyone that 2005/2006 is the year that HD will start to become a major driver for buying new TV equipment.

For those who haven’t watched HDTV on a large screen – let me tell you, it’s impressive. It looks far more real that Standard Definition (SD) and makes a return to watching SD difficult.

Will the dazzle of HD blind the buying public to the loss of control they will have over what they previously thought of as “their media”?

What do I mean, loss of control? Well, there are changes underway which mean that what you previously did without thinking (eg. recording a TV show, backing up a DVD) will become difficult, and in a lot of cases illegal.

Encrypted to the Eyeball

The companies that produce/own audio recordings, video, TV shows and films don’t trust the general public (a director of a large film distributor used those very words to me). Because they don’t trust you, they want to ensure that throughout the value chain (their words – meaning from production, to you watching it), the content will remain encrypted. The only time it’s not encrypted, is when it leaves the screen or speakers and hits your eyes/ears.

This way of locking the content, called Digital Rights Management (DRM), can also restrict other factors such as, whether you can record or how long a recording can be kept for.

DRM protection is intrinsically flawed. It can be broken and traversed. Aware of this, Governments have been lobbied and they‘re making it illegal to examine how a DRM scheme might work.

In Europe this legislation is called the EU Copyright Directive (EUCD), and in the US, it’s the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act ).

Given this, it will be illegal and you will be open to prosecution, if you use a program to take a copy of disc if it has copy protection on it., unless you use an approved application. What you can do with your media will be directly controlled by its rights holder.

If you want to watch films in HD resolution in the future, you will need to ensure that your equipment (Set Top Box, screen, etc) all have a HDMI interface and are able to support HDCP (High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection).

After 1 July this year, it will be against US law to manufacture or sell equipment that is capable of handling/recording HD material, if they do not recognise what is referred to as the Broadcast Flag – a copyright flag that is controlled by the broadcaster. Indeed to qualify for a European “HD Ready” label equipment must support HDCP.

Old equipment might have problems. All those who have bought their dream 42” plasma screen, had better check around the back. If you don’t have full HDMI/DHCP support, your £5,000 screen will be of no use for HD content.

The Content Explosion

While content created by the current commercial entities, like studios, will become more restricted, the good news is that the places that we’ll be able to source media from will increase substantially. It won’t just be from what are currently thought of as “normal” sources.

With a TV connected to a broadband connection (and they will be broad by 2012), you will be able to access the content from around the connected world. Any subject you imagine will have content available about it.

If you’re finding it hard to visualise, think WH Smiths in 1970. Back then the whole range of magazines available to you would have been about 20. These days the groaning shelves take up half of the shop and there are 100’s of regular magazines available to you.

User Generated Content

We are in a period of an explosion of User generated content. It’s no news that this type of content is going to be huge, but it will also be diverse, plentiful and importantly, quite well indexed.

The first few rungs on the Bandwidth Ladder have been reached. Blogging tools, essentially word processors for the Web (they print Web pages not paper), have enabled people to simply generate huge amounts of content online.

Audio content is currently seeing a lot of increase through Podcasting. Already the breadth and depth of the programming available is impressive.

Video is less prevalent and some way off. The delivery and receipt of it are all possible. It’s the generation of original content that is very time consuming, as it is currently cumbersome.

The public creating programming by using pre-made segments of content, is far more achievable. But where do the segments come from?

The BBC Creative Archive is important

The Creative Archive – started as an inspirational idea. The BBC has thousands of hours of content (audio & video) in its archive, This content has already been produced and paid for by the licence payers of the UK.

The inspiration of pioneers of the project was to make this archive content available for people to be able to download, watch, re-edit and create new programming from, to share with the UK. Ideal.

Since the project was floated the BBC has been very good at making the right sounds about it – and have generated interest in the idea around the world.

I hope that the loss of Paula LeDieu a joint- head of the project will not be too big a blow. I also hope the BBC delivers what it has spoken about – a wide range of free programming, which can be freely edited.

To maintain its highly regarded position in the world, the BBC must not continue to make bold new media statements, only to not deliver them. Failure to do so will reflect badly on the whole of the BBC.

Ofcom – Hands off the Internet

Given the restrictions that will be hoisted on to users of media, it is all the more important that there is no restriction on flow of information that can come down your Internet connection. By 2012 this will include your radio and TV.

Having been technical supervisor for the show, seeing the script going through the twists and turns before coming to life – the decision to bring the dark side of IPTV (Internet delivered TV) to centre stage disappointed me.

I felt the programme helps the argument of those who want to control and restrict the Internet and the video/audio it could provide, missing the opportunity to highlight the many great advantages about having a free IP-based media.

I feel it’s important that the limitation of what people can access over the Internet is decided by the individual or household, not an external, overseeing Quango like OfCom.

Conclusion

As with any massive change, there are going to be advantages and disadvantages. I think the advantages of a new form of media, where everyone is able to contribute is a good thing. Any objectionable programmes like The Cage, while they may generate a lot of headlines, are ultimately insignificant when weighed against the advantages against a freer media.

It is vital to a healthy society that expressions are freely available to all, without restriction.

If you see the show, it would be great to hear your thoughts simon(at)Digital-Lifestyles.info.

>BBC IF …

Italian DJ Gets Huge Fine For Copied MP3s

DJ gets biggest ever fine for playing pirated MP3sA “well known” Italian DJ could be hit with a record-breaking fine of up to 1.4 million euros ($1.8 million, £968,000) for using thousands of pirate music files in a nightclub near Rome, police said on Wednesday.

Police in the town of Rieti, near Rome, said they raided a popular nightclub earlier this week as part of a king-size crackdown on piracy and seized 500 illegally copied music videos and more than 2,000 MP3 music files.

The get-tough operation, targeting radio stations and clubs around the region, was led by the Fiscal Police (Guardia Di Financa, that deal with financial crime), who also seized a large quantity of “audiovisual material” and software.

There are a lot of inaccurate reports floating around about this and we wanted to get the full story, so called up the FIMI in Italy. They told us that the copyright law in Italy dates back to 1941 but was most recently updated a year ago. Under the law the DJ was fined 100 Euro ($130, £69) per copied track, this figure was then doubled to 500,000 Euro. Only if the fine is not paid within 60 days, will it increase to 1.4m.

The reason for the doubling was unclear. Under Italian law, the precise details of the case are not made public until the case comes to court.

The DJ is free to appeal against the fine. Once the fine has been finalised, the money can be paid off monthly.

“For the MP3 files, which were kept on the DJ’s personal computer, the DJ has received a fine of 1.4 million euros,” Rieti finance police said in a statement (the fine is subject to administrative recourse). The DJ may also be subject to further criminal sanctions.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) said the fine was the biggest ever slapped on an individual for unlawful music copying and the use of copyrighted music in the MP3 format.

“We are pleased with the fine imposed by the Rieti Fiscal police,” said Director of the Italian Recording Industry Association (FIMI) Enzo Mazza.

He continued, “This deejay was touring clubs and making money out of the music he played – while those who had invested time, talent, hard work and money into creating the music in the first place did not get a cent. We hope this precedent will serve as a deterrent for those who are thinking of doing the same.”

Seeing as venues already pay money to the collection societies for public dance licenses we find the size of this fine a little baffling.

It could certainly be argued that DJs can act as ambassadors for new music (and therefore the music companies) with some high-profile DJs having a considerable influence on the record buying public.

After all, why else would record companies ply DJs with endless vinyl/promos and other inducements in the hope of getting their tunes played?

Perhaps now that times are more lean for the record companies, they’re cutting back on the freebies.

It appears the line between theft and promotion can sometimes be a blurred one, and we’re not convinced that punishing DJs with such enormous fines is the way the record industry should be protecting their sales…

UK LLU – OTA Say, “Could do Better”

OTA: Local Loop Unbundling Lagging BehindThe Independent Office of the Telecoms Adjudicator (OTA) has issued an update on their progress of ‘local loop unbundling’ (LLU – the process of opening BT’s exchanges to competitors).

The speed of unbundling, or in this case lack of it has a direct effect on the range of competitive broadband providers, and therefore the speed of services that can be provided and their cost.

To date, some 31,000 lines have been unbundled, but the OTA update reads: “Good. But could do better.”

There are reports of variable performance in some operational areas, with performance lagging behind the OTA Key Performance Indicator, ‘Right First Time’. This snappily monikered indicator checks to see if services are being delivered in time to meet customers’ expectations.

The OTA has set a target of 75% with actual delivery being variable at 50-60%. This target rises to 85% in the near future.

The number of lines unbundled has grown from 12,000 in May 2004 to 31,000 lines unbundled by 31 January 2005.

Once again, this falls behind the OTA target, which had specified 50,000 unbundled lines by February 2005.

The Telecoms Adjudicator Scheme is successfully underway, with 14 companies signed up, and encouraging noises about investment commitment, have been heard.

LLU price reductions were implemented from 1 January 2005, and there are more price reductions on the horizon.

Despite all this, LLU operators continue to experience operational problems and variable delivery performance isn’t doing wonders for the operators’ marketing plans.

The Adjudicator’s update tells it like it is: as the orders keep rolling in, operational performance is the key to success for LLU.

Independent Office of the Telecoms Adjudicator
Ofcomwatch comments on it.

Dead Granny sued by RIAA – A Serious Own Goal

RIAA issues legal action to dead womanIf they weren’t already unpopular enough with a large part of the online music file sharers, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has managed to score a spectacular PR own goal by suing a dead woman for swapping music files.

The Associated Press reported that investigators at the RIAA identified Gertrude Walton as a prolific sharer known as “smittenedkitten” and set about bringing this evil distributor of music to justice.

A federal lawsuit was duly filed, with the RIAA claiming that Mrs Walton had shared more than 700 songs through P2P networks.

But there was a slight problem: the defendant was a computer-illiterate 83-year-old grandmother who has never owned a computer.

And there was an even bigger problem: she had died the month before the lawsuit was filed.

After being notified of the upcoming legal action, the dead woman’s daughter, Robin Chianumba, faxed a copy of her mother’s death certificate to RIAA adding, “I am pretty sure she is not going to leave Greenwood Memorial Park (where she is buried) to attend the hearing”.

This king size cock-up does nothing to RIAA’s bully boy reputation. In 2003 the association successfully sued a twelve year-old girl for copyright infringement after her hard drive was found to be harbouring an MP3 file of her favourite TV show. Her working class parents were forced to shell out two thousand dollars in a settlement.

RIAA
Boycott RIAA

Michael Powell, FCC Chair to Go

Michael Powell FCCThe Wall Street Journal is reporting that US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman, Michael Powell, will be leaving his position today.

The rumours of his departure have been circulating for a long time, but what is unexpected is that he is resigning the day after George Bush’s inauguration.

Powell has had his detractors and his supporters. He’s acted as a liberaliser – opening up the VoIP market, and, in some peoples eyes, a restrictor – last year he authorised fines in excess of $7.7 million for indecent programming.

He will, for us, for ever be remembered for calling a TiVo “God’s machine“.

Overall we think he’s been an enthusiastic supporter of technology advances. We hope his replacement will show a similar enthusiasm.

WSJ – FCC Chairman Powell Plans to Step Down (reg. req.)
Seattle Post-Intelligencer – Officials: FCC Chairman Powell to resign

Ofcom Strategic Review of Telecommunications Gets UK Parliament Inquiry

The UK House of Commons launched an inquiry into Ofcom’s Strategic Review of Telecommunications (SRT) yesterday.

Ofcom, the uber-regulator that among other things, oversees telecoms in the UK, started its SRT in January 2004. It was long overdue in the eyes of many, as it was the first comprehensive strategic review of the UK telecommunications sector for 13 years.

Now the UK House of Commons, Trade and Industry Committee will be looking into the workings and results of the SRT, in particular how it relates to the “extensiveness and competitiveness” of broadband in the UK.

The SRT is divided in to three phases; Current position and prospects for the telecommunications sector; Options for Ofcom’s strategic approach to telecommunications regulation; and Proposals; the first phase was published at the end of April.

Ofcom identified two key problems in Phase One; an unstable market structure in fixed telecoms, dominated by BT and with alternative providers that are, in the main, fragmented and of limited scale; BT’s control of the UK-wide access network hadn’t been addressed to date. They then posed some questions; primarily about the future of BT.

Phase Two was published in November 04 and used some relatively strong language (pretty diplomatic in the normal, non-Quango world), which we summarised as “Ofcom to BT: Equivalence or else”. It’s still open for public consultation until 3 February 2005.

Yesterdays announcement from the Trade and Industry Committee, said in the light of the Committee’s Report on the UK Broadband Market, the inquiry will be looking into OfCom’s STR process to date, the interim conclusions reached in the Phase Two document, and the direction of the remainder of the Review. They’ll be paying particular attention how it relates to the competitiveness of the broadband market in the UK, including local loop unbundling, and the “functional separation of British Telecom”.

A spokeperson at OfCom told us that they “had already briefed the Committee” and “welcomed their interest” in the SRT. When we asked about the previously expected Spring delivery of SRT Phase 3, we were told that they “still planned” to meet it. Frankly they were playing their cards pretty close to their chest.

We called the office of the Committee, but given the 21 enquiries they have on currently, no one was available for comment at the time of publishing the story.

If you have any view on the area covered by the Committee, they’re asking for written evidence on these or any other related issues by Friday 18 February 2005 via email ([email protected]). If you do write please CC ([email protected]) us in, we’d be interested in see the issues raised.


Alerted by OfcomWatch
Trade and Industry Select Committee
Ofcom – Strategic Review of Telecommunications

Ofcom Release Ultra Wideband (UWB) Document

Ofcom released a consultation document today on ultra wideband (UWB) in the UK.

Given Ofcom’s statutory duties under the Communications Act 2003 to ensure the optimal use of the radio spectrum under its management, they should be keen on UWB.

The strength of UWB also causes its problems. By simultaneously transmitting over a wide range of frequencies (around 3.1 – 10.6GHz, if you’re interested), UWB is able to achieve higher data transfer rate than other wireless technologies.

By spreading over these frequencies it has the possibility of interfering with services that currently operate in or around these services, such as 3G, broadband fixed wireless access and radio astronomy.

Back in May 2004, Ofcom commissioned Mason Communications and DotEcon to produce an independent report in to UWB. Delivered in December 2004 (Read the final report, all 218 pages of PDF fun), it looked at the advantages to the UK economy of allowing UWB applications and the disadvantages of increased interference to existing radio spectrum users.

The report focuses on the use of UWB to create a Personal Area Network (PAN) with examples of usage being; providing wireless connections between DVD players, displays and speakers; and using them for high speed wireless links between digital cameras and computers.

While acknowledging interference is likely, it’s clear that Ofcom feels this should be weighed carefully against UWB’s potential benefits. To check this interference, the suggestion is to use a technical ‘mask’, controlling the amount of power that could be used at different frequencies, in an attempt to reduce the impact of interference.

The US regulator has already authorised UWB on a licence-exempt basis, but Ofcom consider the US specification to be inappropriate for the UK. Their proposal is that if UWB is allowed, it should be on a licence-exempt basis, but be limited to the same in-band power levels as permitted in the US, but have tighter out-of-band limits.

Ofcom point out that there is a need to come to a decision soon, fearing US-built UWB devices could be imported in to the UK.

All of these add up to a big pressure on the frequency users that would be affected. It will be interesting to see what their reaction will be during the consultation period which closes 24 March 2005.

Ofcom Ultra Wideband consultation document
Mason Communications and DotEcon final report

UK Households Buying Second Digital TV, Ofcom

In Ofcom’s morning release of its third quarter figures for digital TV (dTV) penetration in the UK, they’re reporting an estimated 55.9% of UK households now have dTV in some form.

The dominant provider of dTV in the UK is still Sky, with over 7m subscribers, although they have only added 53,000 more in the quarter.

With just short of 4m households is Freeview (the UK Free-To-Air Digital Terrestrial Television service), which exceeds the combined analogue and digital services of UK cable TV providers NTL & Telewest. Pure digital cable is running at 2.5m subscribers.

One of the big concerns with digital switch off has been going beyond the first dTV set in the house. It was fine to say that over 50% of UK households had digital TV, _but_ given that the UK average is 2.5 sets per household, what was going to happen to the analogue sets that were left? There might be a lot of unhappy people not able to watch TV the day after analogue switch off.

The latest figures bring good news to those worried about this. Around a quarter of new sales of Freeview went to homes that already have one digital TV. With the pricing of the Freeview Set Top Boxes (STB) starting from as little as £49 (~$95, ~€71), households must be finding the content on Freeview compelling enough to want also have it in the kitchen, bedroom or child’s room.

What isn’t clear from the figures, is if the original dTV set was Freeview, Sky or cable. We contacted Ofcom to dig a little deeper, only to find that they “don’t dig that deep” into the figures. One thing that did become clear during the chat, was that Sky household’s that purchase a second box are not broken out at all, but are just added to their overall subscriber base numbers.

Full Ofcom Digital Television Update – Q3 2004