More than 7 years ago, in the early days of my blog, I wrote a piece called “PoIP?” that spoke of the confusion about how to characterize voice over internet protocol from a regulatory perspective.
I wrote:
For all of the talk that VoIP transforms Voice into another computer application, the industry itself hasnāt done a great job promoting new services with all sorts of new capabilities. It might explain why the CRTC thinks that VoIP is the same as POTS and it has therefore been continuing to apply the same regulatory framework to VoIP as it has to POTS. In the eyes of the CRTC, itās just a different engine purring under the hood.
I was reminded of this in reviewing the Let’s Talk TV discussion between the CRTC and the panel from Quebecor / Videotron. As Perry Hoffman wrote for Cartt.ca: “The Quebec media giant said it needs āgreater latitudeā to provide consumers the type of content they want, when they want it and on the platform of their choice.”
It is that last point – the platform of their choice – that prompted me to write.
It might be interesting to observe the difference in how video delivery is being treated, compared to how the CRTC has treated voice.
In the Financial Post account of yesterday’s proceeding, CRTC vice-chair Tom Pentefountas is cited asking why Quebecor doesn’t simply give up its broadcasting licenses and exclusively offer on-demand streaming video.
What exactly is that regulatory straitjacket that keeps you from competing with Netflix?
It seems to me that there is confusion about what product consumers are buying. Is video over the internet a product, or is the product video entertainment more generally?
To find regulatory relief, do yesterday’s heavily regulated video delivery companies (“Broadcast Distribution Undertakings” in CRTC-speak) need to exit their old businesses, abandon their embedded investments and offer the same over the top video? What are the characteristics that make over-the-top video distinguishable from over-the-air or BDU-delivered video?
Can we find a more creative framework that encourages regulatory symmetry across platforms, fostering a more competitive marketplace to increase choice and provide greater consumer benefits?