Any of you remember the promise of ISDN? Integrated Services Digital Networks were the rage in telecom design in the late 1980s, promising to make our phone lines run faster and jump higher, integrating voice data and image.

That is a 25 year old technology story, and it is a tale that may have given birth to media convergence a generation ago. That “C”-word led to the premature demise of a number of corporate titans, so we now tend to speak in terms of vertical integration. In its consultation document, the CRTC defined the term as follows:

“vertical integration” refers to the ownership, by one entity, of both programming and distribution undertakings, or, both programming undertakings and production companies.

In other words: cable or satellite companies that own TV stations; or TV stations that produce programming; or presumably all three together. Five years ago, I wrote about what I saw then as the ultimate in convergence in the opening episode of 30 Rock, a show that later enjoyed a full year of story lines parodying the approval of NBC’s acquisition by Comcast. I wrote about this again in June, just before the oral hearings [includes link to interview with CRTC Chair at this year’s Canadian Telecom Summit].

In any case, the CRTC has decided [from its press release]:

Following its examination of consolidation in the broadcasting industry, the CRTC has decided to:

• Prohibit companies from offering television programs on an exclusive basis to their mobile or Internet subscribers. Any program broadcast on television, including hockey games and other live events, must be made available to competitors under fair and reasonable terms.
• Allow companies to offer exclusive programming to their Internet or mobile customers provided that it is produced specifically for an Internet portal or a mobile device. This includes supplementary programming such as behind-the-scenes video clips of a television program, as well as original content.
• Adopt a code of conduct to prevent anti-competitive behaviour and ensure all distributors, broadcasters and online programming services negotiate in good faith. To protect Canadians from losing a television service during negotiations, broadcasters must continue to provide the service in question and distributors must continue to offer it to their subscribers.
• Implement measures to ensure that independent distributors and broadcasters are treated fairly by large integrated companies. At least 25 per cent of specialty services distributed by a large integrated company must be owned by an independent broadcaster. In addition, broadcasters launching a new pay or specialty service must make it available upon request to all distributors as an individual service, even if a commercial agreement has not been finalized.

The CRTC strongly encouraged cable and satellite TV companies “to give Canadians more flexibility in choosing the individual services they want as part of their packages” and has called on Bell, Quebecor (Videotron), Rogers and Shaw to report back by April 1 to detail “the steps they have undertaken to respond to consumer demands.”

The full decision can be found here. The first Appendix to the decision contains a “Code of conduct for commercial arrangements and interactions” and there are statements in other parts of the decision concerning a wide variety of issues, many of which will be the subjects of follow-up proceedings, as detailed in the second Appendix.

Over the past few days, Industry Minister Christian Paradis has delivered two addresses that touch on the national digital strategy. Interestingly, I found that more was said in his remarks to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce annual general meeting last Sunday in St. John’s than in his comments yesterday at the CWTA’s Wireless Canada Technology Showcase in Ottawa. [Note: the Minister’s Wireless Showcase speech was delivered with substantial ad libs and rearranging of the order of the prepared remarks. You can watch the speech beginning at the 8min mark of the Welcoming Remarks video here.]

In Newfoundland, following a discussion of increasing R&D investment by the private sector, Minister Paradis continued with a number of points focused on the Digital Economy:

The digital economy includes everything we can or would like to do online. It includes the creation, supply and use of digital content and technologies that enable everyday life and innovation.

At the heart of the digital economy are information and communications technologies (ICTs)—everything from the personal computer in your home to the multi-purpose mobile devices that many of us can’t seem to live without. Those in the room with teenagers at home already know all too well about that.

When individuals, companies and entire economies adopt these technologies, a number of important things happen. Adoption boosts productivity, accelerates innovation and generates new products, processes and business models.

The value of these technologies is self-evident. And the federal government will do its share to promote adoption of these technologies. We will be launching a new program, announced in the last budget, to promote adoption by small businesses using community colleges as partners.

We will be tabling new legislation on copyright and privacy to ensure that Canadian businesses and individuals have the legal protections to confidently and fully engage in the digital economy. We are boosting our support to increase university capacity in key digital skills disciplines. And this fall, we will be announcing the actions we will take to release more mobile broadband spectrum, thereby ensuring a world-class communications infrastructure in Canada.

But Canada will succeed as a world-leading digital economy only if government and the private sector work together. We look to the support of Chambers of Commerce like yours to ensure that Canada has a world-class digitally skilled workforce and that businesses in all sectors of the economy make smart investments in digital technologies to improve innovation and productivity.

We need to take concrete actions now to lay the foundation for Canada to regain leadership as a digital economy.

In his Ottawa address yesterday, the digital economy was addressed through references to infrastructure and legislation to encourage innovation and adoption of information and communications technologies.

we will be moving our agenda forward this fall in Parliament with the reintroduction of legislation on copyright modernization and privacy amendments. Our legislation will give Canadians the confidence and the full protection of the law that they need to fully engage and participate in this transformative new economy.

It was in the middle of the Wireless speech that we saw more than implementation details – the vision statement:

We envision a Canada where our digital infrastructure is on the leading edge and our businesses and consumers are early adopters. Where our workers have the skills to thrive in this digital economy, and our companies are the technology manufacturers and suppliers to the world.

How do we get there? How will government leadership influence the velocity of digital literacy and adoption?

A few stories about web domain names caught my attention yesterday.

• Canadian band The Tea Party could sell its domain name to the US political movement for $1M or more
• Animal rights activists PETA will launch a .XXX porn site to raise awareness of veganism

Earlier this summer, we read of the scramble to protect corporate brands from the risk of parodies hijacked under the .XXX domain. Further, virtually infinite expansion of internet names agreed by ICANN this past June will present a further challenge to protecting their image.

Canada’s Internet Registry, CIRA, concludes its candidates forum today with voting in its election opening tomorrow. There are real differences between the candidates; if you are a member, be sure to exercise your vote.

The New York Times section in yesterday’s Toronto Star carried an article that first appeared on September 2 “A Digital Plan to Help India’s Poor.”  India is in the midst of creating a biometric database of its 1.2 billion citizens.

But even more radical than its size is the scale of its ambition: to reduce the inequality corroding India’s economic rise by digitally linking every one of India’s people to the country’s growth juggernaut.

The system is intended to be used to verify identities anywhere in the country within eight seconds, using inexpensive hand-held devices linked to mobile phone networks. Of course, the story notes that privacy watchdogs worry about abuse of the identity numbers by state agencies that pay little attention to civil liberties.

The approach, to implement the massive system using veterans from India’s private technology sector is intriguing. The project is intentionally avoiding being captive to the massive bureaucracy that characterizes India’s civil service.

How can digital technology be used to improve conditions for Canada’s lower income households? In the past, I have written about the need to increase the number of homes with computers in the lowest income quintile. Currently only half of these households have a computer. How can we improve the ability of all Canadians to participate in a digital economy?

The major phone and cable companies are suggesting that Open Media is trying to collect twice for one set of bills.

On September 1, CIPPIC filed a costs application on behalf of Open Media, seeking compensation for its participation in the usage based billing proceeding. But, as Bell pointed out in its reply to the costs application, Open Media had raised funds specifically for this regulatory proceeding. Not only did Open Media have a very visible fundraising campaign, but they received substantial matching financial support from independent ISPs Acanac and Teksavvy.

The CRTC guidelines are pretty clear on this point [see para. 44 of TRP 2010-963]:

In the event that an applicant has received or will receive financial assistance in connection with its participation, then the amount of allowable costs shall be reduced by that amount

Cost awards end up raising prices for all consumers. How would you judge this application?