Aren't we forgetting that most of the Astra/Eutelsat transponders are regionally focused. The footprints aren't designed to be pan-European, regardless of rights issues.
Sky UK doesn't really have the ability to broadcast in Greece (for example), let alone the ground-based infrastructure to charge/collect/control revenues or access.
So would this mean it could be feasible for RTÃ to remove its geoblock at 28.2E should this all go through as indicated?
It could mean that RTÉ could remove their encryption - but doesn't mean they have to. What it means is that film companies that RTE have contracts with couldn't stipluate that RTE can't make their services available outside of Ireland.
Aren't we forgetting that most of the Astra/Eutelsat transponders are regionally focused. The footprints aren't designed to be pan-European, regardless of rights issues.
No - but there are many services that are very easy to receive well outside of their intended territories. The Nordic services on Sirius/Astra and Thor are perfectly receivable in the UK for instance.
Quote:
Sky UK doesn't really have the ability to broadcast in Greece (for example), let alone the ground-based infrastructure to charge/collect/control revenues or access.
No - but it does in France, Belgium or the Netherlands etc. I can imagine that Sky might be quite popular in the Netherlands with the very high levels of English speaking there.
Aren't we forgetting that most of the Astra/Eutelsat transponders are regionally focused. The footprints aren't designed to be pan-European, regardless of rights issues.
I thought the spotbeams largely existed
because
of rights issues? (Or can they reuse the downlink frequencies on, say, the UK spotbeam on the Middle East beam too, as there's no crossover?)
Personally I think opening up rights on a European wide basis will make them less competitive if anything - look at the recent Olympic deal with Discovery/Eurosport. National broadcasters didn't have the opportunity to bid for the full rights and if they're sold on a European basis most haven't got a chance of bidding themselves for the rights. The EBU can bid collectively (as it has long done, though often the bigger TV markets tender separately) but even then it's not exactly fair that for example RTE's ability to win the rights is affected by how much the bigger European PSBs are willing to put forward.
Back to movies and I think the biggest problem is it's all very secretive compared to sports rights. There needs to be more transparency in the market.
Also the Premier League lost it's case back in 2012 against that landlord showing matches off Greek TV yet little has changed - they claimed their graphics were copyrighted and hence UK landlords had no rights to broadcast them (even if the EU was saying the match could be broadcast) so we could see the ridiculous situation where they get around any EU investigation through slapping DOGs on the movie channels.
Aren't we forgetting that most of the Astra/Eutelsat transponders are regionally focused. The footprints aren't designed to be pan-European, regardless of rights issues.
I thought the spotbeams largely existed
because
of rights issues? (Or can they reuse the downlink frequencies on, say, the UK spotbeam on the Middle East beam too, as there's no crossover?)
Spot beams also allow you to run with a higher power - so smaller dishes. The smaller the area you cover for a given transmit power, the stronger signal you receive?
This could also affect IP-based geoblocking for services like Now TV, so the tighter spotbeams for UK satellite services may not be an issue. It sounds like the EU wants anyone to be able to buy a British Now TV or Netflix subscription and get the same content across the union.
I want to be clear on one point: we are not calling into question the possibility to grant licenses on a territorial basis, or trying to oblige studios to sell rights on a pan-European basis.
Rather, our investigation will focus on restrictions that prevent the selling of the content in response to unsolicited requests from viewers located in other Member States - the so-called "passive sales" - or to existing subscribers who move or travel abroad.
To illustrate: if you subscribe to a Pay TV service in Germany and you go to Italy for holidays, you may not be able to view the films offered by that service from your laptop during your holidays. Similarly, if I live in Belgium and want to subscribe to a Spanish Pay TV service, I may not be able to subscribe at all if there is absolute territorial exclusivity.
So the commission says it doesn't want to force rights to be sold on a pan-European basis, but at the same time they want anyone to be able to buy access to territorially licensed content wherever they are. They don't object to territorial licensing, but are against "absolute territorial exclusivity". To me, that sound like a distinction without a difference.
Netflix and others have already managed to sell lots of subscriptions through "passive sales" in areas where they aren't officially available. Imagine how that could increase once this practise gets sanctioned by the EU and you don't have to use dodgy plugins and VPNs.
This could also affect IP-based geoblocking for services like Now TV, so the tighter spotbeams for UK satellite services may not be an issue. It sounds like the EU wants anyone to be able to buy a British Now TV or Netflix subscription and get the same content across the union.
I want to be clear on one point: we are not calling into question the possibility to grant licenses on a territorial basis, or trying to oblige studios to sell rights on a pan-European basis.
Rather, our investigation will focus on restrictions that prevent the selling of the content in response to unsolicited requests from viewers located in other Member States - the so-called "passive sales" - or to existing subscribers who move or travel abroad.
To illustrate: if you subscribe to a Pay TV service in Germany and you go to Italy for holidays, you may not be able to view the films offered by that service from your laptop during your holidays. Similarly, if I live in Belgium and want to subscribe to a Spanish Pay TV service, I may not be able to subscribe at all if there is absolute territorial exclusivity.
So the commission says it doesn't want to force rights to be sold on a pan-European basis, but at the same time they want anyone to be able to buy access to territorially licensed content wherever they are. They don't object to territorial licensing, but are against "absolute territorial exclusivity". To me, that sound like a distinction without a difference.
Netflix and others have already managed to sell lots of subscriptions through "passive sales" in areas where they aren't officially available. Imagine how that could increase once this practise gets sanctioned by the EU and you don't have to use dodgy plugins and VPNs.
Yes - interesting times.
It's an interesting state of affairs. I can absolutely see that not being able to watch your UK Netflix or Sky Go / Now TV when you are on holiday in another EU member state could be seen as a real issue.
I can see that a contract that forbids you from allowing those in other member states to watch content that you, as a broadcaster, have a contract to show in your member state, could be seen as restrictive.
it's a tricky balancing act to differentiate between passive sales and marketing your content out of your home territory.
I think it is a reasonable guess that pay-TV operators in small countries pay less for the rights to content than pay-TV operators in bigger countries, as the larger countries can expect greater revenue and thus will make more money from the content than operators in smaller countries.
If smaller country-based operations can compete with Sky UK in the UK, this will generate an element of competition. Of course then rights holders may start expecting more income from the smaller operators - as they become bigger. So it will potentially generate some competition?
I guess this is the competition that the EU want?
It also allows for ex-pats to continue watching their domestic pay-TV and streaming services?
Wonder where this leaves licence-fee and state funded services like the BBC? Freesat means that BBC services are available outside the UK (subject to dish size issues) so there is no issue there, but the BBC do geo-block iPlayer - including the live streams which require a TV licence in the UK. Similarly in France there is a Freesat-from-Sky equivalent that requires a viewing card. Should a UK resident be able to purchase/lease a viewing card in the same way as a French national can? Should a UK resident be able to subscribe to Canal Digital Denmark?
Wonder where this leaves licence-fee and state funded services like the BBC? Freesat means that BBC services are available outside the UK (subject to dish size issues) so there is no issue there, but the BBC do geo-block iPlayer - including the live streams which require a TV licence in the UK. Similarly in France there is a Freesat-from-Sky equivalent that requires a viewing card. Should a UK resident be able to purchase/lease a viewing card in the same way as a French national can? Should a UK resident be able to subscribe to Canal Digital Denmark?
This story from May appears to be the start of the current issue, where they want iPlayer and NOW TV to be accessible in member states.
Wonder where this leaves licence-fee and state funded services like the BBC? Freesat means that BBC services are available outside the UK (subject to dish size issues) so there is no issue there, but the BBC do geo-block iPlayer - including the live streams which require a TV licence in the UK. Similarly in France there is a Freesat-from-Sky equivalent that requires a viewing card. Should a UK resident be able to purchase/lease a viewing card in the same way as a French national can? Should a UK resident be able to subscribe to Canal Digital Denmark?
This story from May appears to be the start of the current issue, where they want iPlayer and NOW TV to be accessible in member states.
So - if the BBC introduced a licence-fee-linked login for iPlayer, I wonder how that would work? Presumably you'd be fine as holiday maker watching out-of-region, but that would make it difficult for ex-pats or just normal residents in another country to access it?
No problem at all, once the framework is established, rights holders in all genres would have to accept the new rules. BBC could then legitimately exploit the new situation and sell access to the iPlayer throughout the EU and eventually globally. A situation that would give an enormous boost to it's finances.