Today’s upgraded networks based on the Internet protocol (IP) allow telecommunication providers to offer not only voice and data, but also video services known as IP television, or IPTV. However, its deployment can bring challenges for existing laws and regulations.
Broadcasting or telecommunications?
Broadcasting and telecommunications are converging, but to which of these does IPTV belong? Various approaches have been taken to this question, ranging from simply not classifying IPTV, to defining it as a regulated broadcasting service. Or, some services offered over IPTV platforms are seen as broadcasting, but not others.
In the United States, for example, IPTV has yet to be classified, although the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has addressed barriers to its deployment. A technology-neutral approach has been adopted by countries such as Canada, where IPTV is seen as a broadcast distribution technology for television programming, and companies are licensed accordingly. In Singapore, “broadcasting” includes the IP transmission of any television programmes — scheduled channels or video on demand (VoD). The Republic of Korea classifies IPTV as an “Internet multimedia broadcasting” service.
Some jurisdictions base their regulatory classification of IPTV services on how much interactivity they allow. For instance, New Zealand and countries in the European Union differentiate between transmissions at a scheduled time (subject to broadcasting and content regulations), and VoD that the user can select and view whenever desired (wholly or partially exempt from regulation).
Most operators of third-generation (3G) mobile services offer VoD or streaming video. Regulators have only recently begun to consider the regulatory classification of these services, which also use the Internet. Some countries classify mobile television as an information service, while others regulate it as broadcasting.
Regulating content
Countries have various regimes for regulating the content of video transmissions. Restrictions might apply only to free, over-the-air broadcasts, or only to subscription television services. Alternatively, specific content regulations may be developed for different types of operator.
In certain jurisdictions (such as Singapore) IPTV must obey the content regulations imposed on subscription television. In many European countries, IPTV operators using fixed networks are subject to “must-carry” rules that oblige cable or satellite operators to rebroadcast the signals of local over-the-air television stations. As in the EU, the regulator in India says that telecommunication providers offering IPTV services should not be subject to regulation for unaltered content obtained from television broadcasters. However, IPTV providers should follow the programme and advertising codes that govern cable television networks.
Licensing issues
Who provides IPTV?
As well as mobile phone companies, telecommunication providers — such as France Telecom, Telefónica in Spain, AT&T and Verizon in the United States, and PCCW in Hong Kong, China — are offering IPTV over their copper asymmetric digital subscriber lines (ADSL) or, increasingly, fibre-optic networks. Newcomers, including Fastweb in Italy and Hanaro in the Republic of Korea, may offer IPTV as part of a basic ADSL subscription. Cable and satellite companies also offer IPTV, while equipment manufacturers are introducing IPTV into their set-top boxes in combination with digital cable, terrestrial, or satellite access. In addition, some firms that offer subscription television channels are combining IPTV with existing packages to offer enhanced functionality, such as on-demand content.
There is also a variety of approaches towards the licensing of IPTV. European countries, for example, take a technology-neutral approach that considers any television service, provided over any platform, to be broadcasting. Canada says a broadcasting licence is needed for any television service (including VoD) that is provided over a managed IP network.
In some countries, such as the Republic of Korea, new licences have been developed for IPTV services. In Pakistan, IPTV providers must not only obtain a licence for an IPTV channel distribution service, they must also hold a fixed local loop licence for the same coverage area. In Singapore, all companies wanting to offer any form of subscription television require a licence. This includes IPTV (scheduled channels or VoD) sent to households via broadband.
In Hong Kong, China, IPTV providers must obtain a licence for providing domestic subscription television. However, as in Pakistan, these are only granted if the operator already holds a fixed network licence. In India, the regulator says that telecommunication operators and cable operators offering IPTV should be licensed according to the separate legislation that applies to their fields.
Network unbundling
In order to promote competition, several countries have required the unbundling of local loops, including all members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), except Mexico, and many developing countries. Where IPTV already has a high market penetration (such as in France, Italy and Spain), unbundling has been a key factor allowing new entrants to develop competing offers and increase the spread of IPTV.
As incumbents build upgraded next-generation networks, regulators are considering whether to modify unbundling rules so as to avoid disrupting the incumbents’ broadband Internet and IPTV services. Among the issues being considered is the feasibility of unbundling the last mile of fibre-optic networks, and whether to introduce access obligations for additional local-loop elements.
Clarity is required
For regulators, there is no right or wrong approach. What is important is to give IPTV service providers certainty about how they will be regulated. It is also important to minimize jurisdictional debates among government agencies, as well as regulatory hurdles and licensing requirements that delay the deployment of new services that hold such potential benefits for consumers.
Broadcasting or telecommunications?
Broadcasting and telecommunications are converging, but to which of these does IPTV belong? Various approaches have been taken to this question, ranging from simply not classifying IPTV, to defining it as a regulated broadcasting service. Or, some services offered over IPTV platforms are seen as broadcasting, but not others.
In the United States, for example, IPTV has yet to be classified, although the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has addressed barriers to its deployment. A technology-neutral approach has been adopted by countries such as Canada, where IPTV is seen as a broadcast distribution technology for television programming, and companies are licensed accordingly. In Singapore, “broadcasting” includes the IP transmission of any television programmes — scheduled channels or video on demand (VoD). The Republic of Korea classifies IPTV as an “Internet multimedia broadcasting” service.
Some jurisdictions base their regulatory classification of IPTV services on how much interactivity they allow. For instance, New Zealand and countries in the European Union differentiate between transmissions at a scheduled time (subject to broadcasting and content regulations), and VoD that the user can select and view whenever desired (wholly or partially exempt from regulation).
Most operators of third-generation (3G) mobile services offer VoD or streaming video. Regulators have only recently begun to consider the regulatory classification of these services, which also use the Internet. Some countries classify mobile television as an information service, while others regulate it as broadcasting.
Regulating content
Countries have various regimes for regulating the content of video transmissions. Restrictions might apply only to free, over-the-air broadcasts, or only to subscription television services. Alternatively, specific content regulations may be developed for different types of operator.
In certain jurisdictions (such as Singapore) IPTV must obey the content regulations imposed on subscription television. In many European countries, IPTV operators using fixed networks are subject to “must-carry” rules that oblige cable or satellite operators to rebroadcast the signals of local over-the-air television stations. As in the EU, the regulator in India says that telecommunication providers offering IPTV services should not be subject to regulation for unaltered content obtained from television broadcasters. However, IPTV providers should follow the programme and advertising codes that govern cable television networks.
Licensing issues
Who provides IPTV?
As well as mobile phone companies, telecommunication providers — such as France Telecom, Telefónica in Spain, AT&T and Verizon in the United States, and PCCW in Hong Kong, China — are offering IPTV over their copper asymmetric digital subscriber lines (ADSL) or, increasingly, fibre-optic networks. Newcomers, including Fastweb in Italy and Hanaro in the Republic of Korea, may offer IPTV as part of a basic ADSL subscription. Cable and satellite companies also offer IPTV, while equipment manufacturers are introducing IPTV into their set-top boxes in combination with digital cable, terrestrial, or satellite access. In addition, some firms that offer subscription television channels are combining IPTV with existing packages to offer enhanced functionality, such as on-demand content.
There is also a variety of approaches towards the licensing of IPTV. European countries, for example, take a technology-neutral approach that considers any television service, provided over any platform, to be broadcasting. Canada says a broadcasting licence is needed for any television service (including VoD) that is provided over a managed IP network.
In some countries, such as the Republic of Korea, new licences have been developed for IPTV services. In Pakistan, IPTV providers must not only obtain a licence for an IPTV channel distribution service, they must also hold a fixed local loop licence for the same coverage area. In Singapore, all companies wanting to offer any form of subscription television require a licence. This includes IPTV (scheduled channels or VoD) sent to households via broadband.
In Hong Kong, China, IPTV providers must obtain a licence for providing domestic subscription television. However, as in Pakistan, these are only granted if the operator already holds a fixed network licence. In India, the regulator says that telecommunication operators and cable operators offering IPTV should be licensed according to the separate legislation that applies to their fields.
Network unbundling
In order to promote competition, several countries have required the unbundling of local loops, including all members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), except Mexico, and many developing countries. Where IPTV already has a high market penetration (such as in France, Italy and Spain), unbundling has been a key factor allowing new entrants to develop competing offers and increase the spread of IPTV.
As incumbents build upgraded next-generation networks, regulators are considering whether to modify unbundling rules so as to avoid disrupting the incumbents’ broadband Internet and IPTV services. Among the issues being considered is the feasibility of unbundling the last mile of fibre-optic networks, and whether to introduce access obligations for additional local-loop elements.
Clarity is required
For regulators, there is no right or wrong approach. What is important is to give IPTV service providers certainty about how they will be regulated. It is also important to minimize jurisdictional debates among government agencies, as well as regulatory hurdles and licensing requirements that delay the deployment of new services that hold such potential benefits for consumers.
Who provides IPTV?
As well as mobile phone companies, telecommunication providers — such as France Telecom, Telefónica in Spain, AT&T and Verizon in the United States, and PCCW in Hong Kong, China — are offering IPTV over their copper asymmetric digital subscriber lines (ADSL) or, increasingly, fibre-optic networks. Newcomers, including Fastweb in Italy and Hanaro in the Republic of Korea, may offer IPTV as part of a basic ADSL subscription. Cable and satellite companies also offer IPTV, while equipment manufacturers are introducing IPTV into their set-top boxes in combination with digital cable, terrestrial, or satellite access. In addition, some firms that offer subscription television channels are combining IPTV with existing packages to offer enhanced functionality, such as on-demand content.
No comments:
Post a Comment