The Russian TV channels are very concerned when their broadcast is available in internet without their permission. The ad revenues, generated by such broadcast, flow to the packets of providers making TV channels’ broadcast available in internet. Besides TV channels don’t always have online rights for certain programming they broadcast. TV channels want control online consuming of their programming, including ad revenue generating by online broadcasting, the ad revenues generated by traditional TV decreasing each year.
Category: Communication to the public
There has been published another research on illegal IPTV consuming. Streaming is most popular way of access and consuming of content. It could be said about audio visual content as well as music. The purpose of research “was to enhance the level of understanding about the ways illegal IPTV is carried out, how the business models around this phenomenon work” and how to handle the problem with illegal IPTV. There is no sense to overwrite the whole study, but the there is some interesting thing attracting attention, like copyright infringing business models.
Under this option, press publishers would still need to acquire authors’ authorisation to publish their contributions in a newspaper or a magazine, as they do today. Therefore, the relationship authors-publishers would remain untouched. In contrast, this option would provide these publishers with a substantial added value when it comes to licensing out their publications for online uses by third parties, something that is increasingly important for them in the digital environment.
The Russian television channel (The First Channel) produces a television program famous in Russia. The program is called “What? Where? When?” where the experts answers the questions asked by the viewers. The program consists of certain amount of rounds. Between these rounds there is musical pause. In one episode of this program, during musical pause, the group of musicians has performed the song. The programs has been broadcasted and then uploaded to the web-site of the channel.
What is the current situation for online transmission and retransmission of television and radio programmes?
Broadcasters are increasingly offering their broadcasts online (for instance through their simulcasting or catch-up services). However, such online programming often remains unavailable in other Member States, even if there is interest abroad to access it. The clearance of rights for such uses can be particularly burdensome: a broadcaster needs to obtain authorisations from various rightholders, for different categories of works and other protected content, and separately for every Member State, where the programme will be available online.
Publishers are increasingly facing difficulties in relation to the digital exploitation of, and the enforcement of rights in, press publications such as newspapers and magazines. The changes to the way copyright-protected content is distributed and consumed in the digital environment have affected press publications in a specific way. The publishing industry is in the middle of a shift from print to digital.
An obligation on online services which store and give access to large amounts of protected content uploaded by their users to put in place appropriate and proportionate technologies and to increase transparency vis-a-vis rights holders
Against the backdrop of the role of user uploaded content services in the communication to the public of protected content, the establishment of an obligation to deploy technical means will have a positive impact on right holders.
Due to its voluntary nature, it seems unlikely that stakeholder dialogues will result in sufficient improvements in the take up, efficiency and transparency of technologies in comparison to the possible evolution of the market.
Impact on creative industries’ and right holders’ capacity to control better the availability of their content on user uploaded content services and thereby negotiate with the services the conditions of such use: as the implementation by the services of technologies, such as content identification technologies, will remain voluntary and based on the terms set by the services, it is likely that the baseline scenario will not lead to improvements for rightholders who are likely to continue having difficulties to enter into negotiations and/or negotiate fair terms for the use of their content.
No policy intervention. This option would rely on the voluntary deployment of technologies by user uploaded content services, which will continue to apply their own terms and level of transparency as to the functioning of the technologies.