Canadian ISPs Continue Quest To Bankrupt TVAddons, Site That Hosted Tons Of Legal Kodi Addons

from the crazy-stuff dept

A few years back we wrote about how various Canadian telcos had appeared to completely lose their minds over TVAddons, a Canadian site that hosted various software add-ons for Kodi (open source home theater software that was originally the Xbox Media Center or XBMC). Now, it is true that there's a thriving market in pirated content via Kodi boxes and the like, but TVAddons was just a site that hosted all sorts of add-ons, and most of them had nothing at all to do with infringing content. As we mentioned in our original article, out of over 1,500 add-ons, only 22 were found to involve infringing content. To put this in perspective, think of the VCR/Betamax in the early years, when Jack Valenti was insisting that it would be the "Boston Strangler" to the movie industry. Back then, a ton of the content being passed around on those tapes would likely be considered infringing -- in part because that was before the industry learned to embrace home video (which quickly became a huge moneymaker for Hollywood). But that was found legal because, as the Supreme Court noted, there were "substantial non-infringing uses" of the technology. It seems pretty damn clear that there are "substantial non-infringing uses" of Kodi add-ons as well, and especially of a platform like TVAddons, that was there just to host those add-ons -- and not to host any infringing content directly.

However, as we noted in that original piece, it seemed quite clear that the Canadian telcos were so hellbent on destroying TVAddons and its founder, Adam Lackman, that it didn't seem to care about any of this. They got a special "Anton Piller" order in Canada that allowed their own private investigators to search his home and take his stuff. While this was going on, Lackman called his lawyer, and the lawyers for the telcos literally ordered him to hang up and not talk to his lawyer. As we noted, this wasn't the police -- this was private companies ransacking a guy's house, because some people might possibly use some software that was hosted on his open platform for possibly infringing uses.

Years later, it's perhaps not surprising that these Canadian telcos -- namely Bell Canada, Rogers, Videotron and TVA -- appear to have no interest in letting this case end. They remain hellbent on destroying Lackman and the site. While Lackman initially won the first round of the case, in which a court noted that the Anton Piller order was clearly unlawful, he lost on appeal, and was told he needs to pay the legal fees of the giant telcos, even though no actual trial has taken place (all of this is on preliminary issues)

Lackman has now been left in the unenviable position of having to set up a GoFundMe just to try to raise enough to pay for the giant telcos legal fees, let alone continue the actual legal fight. The whole setup is ridiculous: giant companies (who never even sent a takedown notice to TV Addons) get to do a private raid, take all of his stuff (which was later recognized as against the law), block him from talking to his lawyer, and then bankrupt him through an ongoing legal process.

This kind of story, of course, is not unique. We've seen it play out in many different ways over the years, but it's particularly galling to see how it's playing out here.

Filed Under: adam lackman, addons, anton piller, canada, kodi
Companies: bell, rogers, tvaddons

Canadian Cable Companies Make A Mockery Of Government's Push For Cheaper TV

from the forced-innovation dept

So far, the Canadian government's attempt to force innovation and lower prices on the Canadian TV industry doesn't appear to be going so well. As previously noted, the government has demanded that all Canadian cable TV operators begin offering a so-called "skinny" bundles of smaller, cheaper channels starting this month, and the option to buy channels "a la carte" starting in December. But this being the cable industry, companies are finding all manner of ways to tap dance over, under and around the requirements.

Bell's solution is to offer a skinny bundle, but hide it from the company's customers. And while most Canadian operators last week unveiled discounted base bundles starting at around $25, they've saddled the options with all manner of fees to ensure that once a customer actually gets their bill, their prices remain as high as always. DVR rental fees, home gateway rental fees, HD fees, "digital service fees," fees for additional channel packs (since the core pack is intentionally left sparse), and installation fees all quickly demolish any proposed savings.

And companies like Rogers have generously gotten ahead of the December requirement for individual channel purchases, by offering sports channels a la carte -- but at the rock-bottom price of $18 a piece:

Ahead of the Canadian rollout, major cable operator Rogers Communications began offering two sports add-ons — TSN and Sportsnet — at $18 each, bringing a sports fan's bill to a minimum $61 a month, not much below the $66 a month for a similar sports-included package that has 230 more channels.

The same thing is happening over at Shaw, where customers will be paying a pretty penny to nab the channels they actually want:

Prices for Shaw’s pick-and-pay channels, which include A&E, CNBC and Fox News among others, range between $3 and $5 per month. More popular channels, like AMC, Bravo and CNN, are only available if you purchase them in $6-$8 channel bundles. Premium movie channels, meanwhile, are priced at $18 per month.

So a move that the CRTC insisted would usher in an "era of choice for Canadian television viewers," appears to be doing nothing of the sort, with most of the bundles designed specifically to make them as unappealing as possible. One Bell employee tells the CBC the company's intentionally making the new bundles "unbuyable," while "just sort of giving the CRTC the finger." And while Canadian Law Professor remains optimistic that the CRTC's gambit will work, it remains unclear precisely when or how this is supposed to happen.

Granted it's early, but whether or not the CRTC's push for flexible options actually works will depend largely on whether the regulator is willing to call the industry's bluff on below-the-line fee shenanigans, something North American regulators as a whole aren't known for. And as with the attempt to disrupt the lowly cable box here in the States, one's left wondering if it doesn't make more sense for regulators to give up on trying to "fix" a TV model that's slowly-but surely dying, and focus any serious regulatory efforts on making sure there's broadband competition so that these same companies can't use usage caps to hinder Internet video competition.

Filed Under: a la carte, canada, hidden, tv
Companies: bell, rogers, shaw

Canadian Cablecos Dodge Government Demand For Cheaper TV Bundles -- By Hiding Them From Consumers

from the compliance-tap-dance dept

This week, the Canadian government will begin forcing Canadian cable operators to provide cheaper, more flexible cable TV packages. Under the new CRTC rules, companies must provide a so-called "skinny bundle" of discounted TV channels starting March 1, and the option to buy channels a la carte starting December 1. But while the CRTC's attempt to force innovation on the cable industry may be well-intentioned, it's already clear that Canadian cable operators plan to do everything in their power to tap dance around the requirements.

One of the tricks, apparently, involves companies like Rogers and Bell simply refusing to seriously advertise the new options to consumers. A Bell training document leaked to the CBC clearly tells employees that they shouldn't even bring up the option unless the customer asks:

"The Bell training document states: "Do not promote the Starter TV package. There will be no advertising, and this package should only be discussed if the customer initiates the conversation."

In addition to refusing to advertise the new options, Bell and Rogers employees tell the news outlet that the packages are saddled with a large number of below-the-line fees, so that what appears to be a bargain is anything but once Canadian consumers actually get their bills:

"The Bell document also shows that add-ons to the basic "Starter" pack can become so costly that what was supposed to be a good deal for Canadians could wind up, in some cases, costing more than their current cable bill..."They're making the skinny basic package simply unbuyable," he said. "What's been explained to me is that maybe one per cent of people would be interested in getting it."

So whereas the new option may be advertised (barely) as a discounted tier, once you saddle the tier with restrictions, fees, hardware rental charges and other below-the-line surcharges, consumers won't be getting much of a deal. And, unless the CRTC is willing to police each and every bill and force total pricing transparency on misleading fees (which neither the FCC nor CRTC have much of a history with), the entire effort risks being for naught.

The other problem is that even if cable operators are forced to offer better, cheaper, TV options, they'll just turn around and recoup any lost revenue on the broadband side of the equation. In Canada, that historically has involved hitting uncompetitive broadband markets with usage caps and overage fees -- just like Comcast's efforts here in the States. Given the TV sector is ripe for disruption from Internet video either way, it may make more sense for regulators to focus their attention solely on boosting broadband competition, letting traditional, expensive television continue its slow but steady death spiral.

Filed Under: a la carte tv, canada, crtc, transparency, tv bundles
Companies: bell, rogers communications

Canadian Telcos Appoint Ex-Cabinet Ministers To Their Boards

from the not-as-bad-as-it-seems dept

Two of Canada's big three telcos have recently appointed former cabinet ministers of the ruling party's government to their respective boards. A few weeks ago, Bell appointed Jim Prentice, who was responsible for telecom policy and regulating companies like Bell while serving as Minister of Industry in 2007-2008. Then, while former cabinet minister Stockwell Day's new "government relations" not-a-lobbying-firm has raised concerns about loopholes in lobbying laws, this past weekend Telus named Day to its board. (How long until Rogers aligns with industry standards and finds an ex-minister of their own?) OpenMedia.ca decried both appointments as examples of big telecom "cozying up to the government," but journalist Peter Nowak argues it's the system's fault: "Lobbying is so pervasive and deeply integrated" into the system that the only way to deal with it seems to be to "fight fire with fire," as even new wireless carriers have quickly learned -- i.e. don't hate the players, hate the game.

Neither Prentice nor Day will be lobbyists, but it seems obvious that their knowledge of government is being sought for the purposes of lobbying. In the broadband space, Bell has been butting heads with the government and regulators over issues like wholesale usage-based billing. In the wireless space, the next spectrum auction is approaching and incumbents want to avoid a repeat of the last auction, where 40% of the spectrum was reserved for new entrants and the government forced incumbents to offer roaming agreements -- rules ironically set by Bell's new board member, Jim Prentice.

Are these appointments examples of regulatory capture? It might appear that way. It's certainly a case of telcos gearing up for a heavy round of lobbying that's unlikely to favor consumers, but it's hardly a case of blatant revolving doors. Day was not actually responsible for telecom policy, and Prentice was behind rules that angered incumbents. If the government favors incumbents in the next spectrum auction or backs down on wholesale usage-based billing, that would be a different story, but Canadian incumbents are scrambling because they've lost some big battles. This isn't so much a cause for deep concern as it is a challenge to those who favor more competition in Canada to keep pressing the government to follow through on what it's started.

Filed Under: canada, corruption, lobbying, politics, telcos
Companies: bell, telus