Probe launched into Sky TV content deals

Forums › Sky and IGLOO › Probe launched into Sky TV content deals

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

silverlake

89 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 637649 8-Jun-2012 09:22
Jas777: Never going to happen. ABC is funded by Australian Taxpayers so why would they broadcast it to NZ? The only way it would happen is if NZ becomes the 7th state and is treated like Tasmania. Do you want that to happen? Well, if you go to Europe you will find that there is a lot of cross-border TV watching going on - and not just eavesdropping on satellites. Dutch cable carries British, German, Belgian and Italian channels. The main obstacle to Australian broadcasters broadcasting to NZ is that NZ broadcast rights are separate from Australian broadcast rights (eg: although ABC own the rights to broadcast Doc Martin in Australia, they don't own the rights to broadcast it in NZ). I am certainly in favour of a closer relationship with Australia and I think that our separate copyright jurisdiction works to our disadvantage. I would be quite happy if some of the NZ tax that I pay went to the ABC if it meant that we could view ABC TV and listen to ABC radio.

crackrdbycracku

884 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 637670 8-Jun-2012 09:48
silverlake: The main obstacle to Australian broadcasters broadcasting to NZ is that NZ broadcast rights are separate from Australian broadcast rights (eg: although ABC own the rights to broadcast Doc Martin in Australia, they don't own the rights to broadcast it in NZ). So in other words who ever has those rights gets to sell them to an Australian broadcaster and then to a New Zealand broadcaster. Firstly, if I held those rights this would be a good situation because I would want to sell the same product as many times as possible. This is why there are regional DVDs and why we can't watch NetFlix without a VPN or similar. Wouldn't it be cool is broadcast rights were international? Then if Amazon or NetFlix or whoever had the rights they could distribute the content anywhere. Yeah, wonder why that hasn't happened? Secondly, if I was an Australian broadcaster and I was offered the choice of buying the rights to show content in Australia or a package deal where I paid for the rights to show content in Australia and New Zealand but had to pay more, probably the current cost of both combined, I probably wouldn't see that as a good deal. My focus is the Australian market, the NZ market is probably so small is simply doesn't register. The market structures we have are there for a reason. I get your point and Apple does too. iTunes is the one example I can think of where distribution rights seem to be international, at least mostly. But from what I have heard that is a very special case and beats me how they did it. Didn't anybody tell you I was a hacker?

silverlake

89 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 637829 8-Jun-2012 14:13
crackrdbycracku: silverlake: The main obstacle to Australian broadcasters broadcasting to NZ is that NZ broadcast rights are separate from Australian broadcast rights (eg: although ABC own the rights to broadcast Doc Martin in Australia, they don't own the rights to broadcast it in NZ). So in other words who ever has those rights gets to sell them to an Australian broadcaster and then to a New Zealand broadcaster. Firstly, if I held those rights this would be a good situation because I would want to sell the same product as many times as possible. This is why there are regional DVDs and why we can't watch NetFlix without a VPN or similar. Wouldn't it be cool is broadcast rights were international? Then if Amazon or NetFlix or whoever had the rights they could distribute the content anywhere. Yeah, wonder why that hasn't happened? Secondly, if I was an Australian broadcaster and I was offered the choice of buying the rights to show content in Australia or a package deal where I paid for the rights to show content in Australia and New Zealand but had to pay more, probably the current cost of both combined, I probably wouldn't see that as a good deal. My focus is the Australian market, the NZ market is probably so small is simply doesn't register. The market structures we have are there for a reason. I get your point and Apple does too. iTunes is the one example I can think of where distribution rights seem to be international, at least mostly. But from what I have heard that is a very special case and beats me how they did it. Your first and second points are both argued from the perspective of the copyright owners. The segmentation of the global market along national lines suits the big businesses that own the copyrights - they are able to sell the same content at different prices in order to maximise value in each market. My point is that as consumers in a small market we get a particularly bad deal - we would get a better deal if we were part of a bigger segment (ie: Australia).

crackrdbycracku

884 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 637838 8-Jun-2012 14:48
@silverlake: Your first and second points are both argued from the perspective of the copyright owners. The segmentation of the global market along national lines suits the big businesses that own the copyrights - they are able to sell the same content at different prices in order to maximise value in each market. My point is that as consumers in a small market we get a particularly bad deal - we would get a better deal if we were part of a bigger segment (ie: Australia). It's all about the perspective. I'm not going to try to argue the subjective concept of 'fair' with you, my guess is that we would probably agree. The thing is the copyright holders have money and that equals power and that is about that. My fictional buddies the Sky Guys would probably argue it is about keeping jobs, their's, and focus local but really it comes down to who has a big enough stake and a big enough pile of cash to get what they want. I this case the copyright owners want the status quo and the content providers here in NZ want the same as they don't want to be a branch office of Australia, if they still have jobs at all. Funny enough both have money to burn and are afraid of change, who would have thought? Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, rich turkeys get the election results they want. YouTube is probably the most disruptive force in content provision there is as most of the stuff there is copyrighted material reproduced without the rights holders permission. The fun thing is that it has Google's money backing it up, and those boys don't believe in the concept of copyright (unless it is Google's copyright as that is different). When this gets the court it will be a pile of fun. Didn't anybody tell you I was a hacker?

silverlake

89 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 637896 8-Jun-2012 16:15
The good news is that as Ultra Fast Broadband is rolled out and HD TV over the internet becomes available we should be able to access content from whatever jurisdiction we choose by using VPN's. Do you think the VPN providers will end up getting the Kim Dotcom treatment?

crackrdbycracku

884 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 637909 8-Jun-2012 16:37
silverlake: The good news is that as Ultra Fast Broadband is rolled out and HD TV over the internet becomes available we should be able to access content from whatever jurisdiction we choose by using VPN's. Do you think the VPN providers will end up getting the Kim Dotcom treatment? I think as long as VPN is a hobbyist think it will be left alone. If it ever threatens to become 'mainstream', by which I mean commercially provided by people who are easy to legally threaten, then that is a different story. I still don't know why there are not providers offering a VPN-in-a-box solution. I'd pay for someone to give me a list of stuff I need to buy, or sell me the hardware with a margin for the trouble; come to my house and set it up; then be on the end of the phone if something doesn't work. I still think this sounds like a business opportunity for someone with the skills and I still haven't heard a good reason why not. Maybe the window of opportunity is too small? The answer to your question is sooner or later; yes. Didn't anybody tell you I was a hacker?

Dratsab

1418 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 637912 8-Jun-2012 16:41
silverlake: Do you think the VPN providers will end up getting the Kim Dotcom treatment? No. They're access providers, not storage/sharing solutions. Chuck Norris has abolished the periodic table of elements. The only element he recognises is the element of surprise!

silverlake

89 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 637921 8-Jun-2012 16:55
Dratsab: silverlake: Do you think the VPN providers will end up getting the Kim Dotcom treatment? No. They're access providers, not storage/sharing solutions. Well I know that VPN providers probably aren't currently doing anything illegal, but they are undermining the ability of copyright owners to enforce their international licencing agreements. Will we see legislation to prevent this and how will it be enforced?

mm1352000

816 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 637941 8-Jun-2012 17:20
crackrdbycracku: I think as long as VPN is a hobbyist think it will be left alone. If it ever threatens to become 'mainstream', by which I mean commercially provided by people who are easy to legally threaten, then that is a different story. I still don't know why there are not providers offering a VPN-in-a-box solution. I'd pay for someone to give me a list of stuff I need to buy, or sell me the hardware with a margin for the trouble; come to my house and set it up; then be on the end of the phone if something doesn't work. I still think this sounds like a business opportunity for someone with the skills and I still haven't heard a good reason why not. You do know about Fyx, right? http://www.fyx.co.nz/ I'd classify that as commercial. [Edit: in fact I am behind the times. They have dropped their proposed "global mode" service for the moment. http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/6916375/Fyx-suspends-Global-Mode ]

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5