| |
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2006-23
|
| |
Ottawa, 31 January 2006 |
| |
Shaw Pay-Per-View Ltd.
Across Canada |
| |
Application 2004-1530-9
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2005-55
7 June 2005 |
| |
Terrestrial pay-per-view service – Licence renewal
|
| |
The Commission renews the
broadcasting licence for Shaw Pay-Per-View Ltd.’s (Shaw)
English-language general interest terrestrial pay-per-view (PPV)
programming undertaking, from 1 February 2006 to 31 August 2010, and
approves the licensee’s request for a licence amendment that will
allow this PPV undertaking to be distributed across Canada. |
| |
This short-term licence renewal will
enable the Commission to next consider the renewal of this licence at
the same time as Shaw’s licence for its direct-to-home PPV programming
undertaking. |
| |
The details regarding the licensee’s
specific proposals for the new licence term, and the conditions of
licence and other obligations determined by the Commission are set out
below. |
|
The application
|
|
1. |
The Commission received an application by
Shaw Pay-Per-View Ltd. (Shaw) for the renewal of the broadcasting
licence for its regional, English-language general interest terrestrial
pay-per-view (PPV) programming undertaking. |
|
2. |
Shaw’s terrestrial PPV service offers
primarily sports, drama and music, and dance programming but also
provides some programming from all the categories set out in Item 6 of
Schedule I of the Pay Television Regulations, 1990, as amended
from time to time. |
|
3. |
The Commission received interventions in
support of Shaw’s terrestrial PPV service’s licence renewal as well as
interventions that commented on or opposed Shaw’s requests for licence
amendments. |
|
4. |
Bell Canada filed an intervention that
raised concerns regarding the 5:1 rule set out in section 18(14) of the
Broadcasting Distribution Regulations (the Regulations). |
|
5. |
The comments and concerns expressed by the
interveners and the Commission’s determinations with respect to these
and other matters are discussed below. |
| |
Request for national distribution
|
|
6. |
Currently, Shaw is authorized to offer its
regional terrestrial PPV service to cable broadcasting distribution
undertakings (BDU) in western Canada. Shaw requested an amendment to its
broadcasting licence that would enable it to offer its terrestrial PPV
service across Canada. Shaw confirmed that it would continue to offer
the PPV programming that currently comprises its regional terrestrial
PPV service, and that it would not acquire exclusive PPV rights. |
|
7. |
As a complement to this request, Shaw
stated that it would make French-language PPV programming available to
BDUs wishing to provide French-language content to their subscribers and
that it would accept the following condition of licence: |
| |
If the licensee offers French-language programming, the licensee
shall ensure that its agreements with the operators of licensed or
exempt terrestrial distribution undertakings operating in
Francophone markets provide that, in each broadcast year, the
following is made available by these licensees to their PPV
subscribers:
|
| |
a minimum of 20 Canadian feature films in the original
French-language version, or dubbed in French, which have been
exhibited in theatres in French-language markets, including all
new Canadian feature films suitable for PPV exhibition that meet
the Industry code of programming standards and practices
governing pay, pay-per-view and video-on-demand services;
|
| |
a minimum of six French-language events in each of years one
and two of operation, eight in each of years three and four, ten
in each of years five and six, and twelve in year seven of
operation; and
|
| |
yearly minimum percentages of Canadian programming as follows:
8% of feature film titles, and 20% of all program titles other
than feature films.
|
| |
Request to amend Canadian programming expenditure requirements
|
|
8. |
Under its current condition of licence,
Shaw must, over the course of the licence term, invest in the production
of Canadian films, the greater of $2.4 million, or 30% of Shaw’s share
of the gross revenues derived from the exhibition of feature films and
events distributed by the BDU affiliates of the PPV service. This
investment must be exclusive of any expenditure made by the licensee on
the promotion of such films. |
|
9. |
For the purpose of this condition of
licence, Shaw calculates its gross revenues as the total amount remitted
to it by terrestrial BDUs that receive retail PPV revenues from
subscribers. The licensee allocates the retail PPV revenues collected by
terrestrial BDUs into two components: the amount paid to third-party
suppliers for content, or the cost of goods sold, and the residual. The
licensee’s practice has been to set its gross revenues at a level
sufficient to cover the cost of goods sold plus one-half of the residual
amount. |
|
10. |
Shaw requested that, during the new licence
term, it be subject to a condition of licence requiring that it devote
5% of its annual gross revenues to existing, independently-administered
Canadian production funds. It also proposed that, for the purpose of
this condition of licence, its annual gross revenues would be deemed to
be 50% of the total retail revenues received from subscribers. |
|
11. |
In support of its request, Shaw submitted
that it is seeking competitive equity with comparable PPV and video-on-demand
(VOD) licensees. Shaw contended that the proposed condition of licence
is similar to that imposed on other PPV and VOD services and that
the proposed method of calculating its gross revenues would be consistent
with the Commission’s determination for VOD services that are affiliated
to or integrated with a distributor, as set out in Introductory
statement to Decisions CRTC 2000-733
to 2000-738: Licensing of new video-on-demand and pay-per-view
services, Public Notice CRTC 2000-172,
14 December 2000 (Public Notice 2000-172).
|
|
12. |
Shaw further noted that, in Decision CRTC
2000-183, 6 June 2000, the
Commission approved licence amendments for the national French-language
terrestrial and direct-to-home (DTH) PPV services, each known as Canal Indigo,
which reduced the required percentage of their gross revenues that
must be contributed to Canadian programming from 10% to 5%. Shaw also
referred to LOOK – MDS licence renewal, Broadcasting
Decision CRTC 2004-347, 16 August
2004, and Craig – MDS licence renewal, Broadcasting Decision
CRTC 2004-349, 16 August
2004, in which the Commission approved requests by LOOK Communications
Inc. (LOOK), and by Craig Wireless International Inc. (Craig), the
licensees of multipoint distribution system BDUs, to reduce the respective
annual percentage of their total subscriber revenues that must be
devoted to support Canadian programming; namely from 7% to 5% for
LOOK, and from 6% to 5% for Craig. |
| |
Interventions
|
|
13. |
Astral Media Inc. (Astral), the Alberta
Motion Picture Industry Association (AMPIA), the Directors Guild of
Canada (DGC), the Alliance of Canadian Cinema Television and Radio
Artists (ACTRA) and Rogers Cable Communications Inc. (Rogers) filed
interventions in connection with Shaw’s proposed licence amendments. |
|
14. |
Astral has ownership interests in the
national French-language terrestrial and DTH PPV Canal Indigo services
and in the regional English-language terrestrial and DTH PPV services
known as Viewer’s Choice that operate in eastern Canada. In Astral’s
view, approval of Shaw’s request for authority to distribute its
terrestrial PPV service across Canada would have a negative financial
impact on the Canal Indigo and Viewer’s Choice services. |
|
15. |
Astral also submitted that the condition of
licence proposed by Shaw with respect to French-language programming is
not consistent with the current conditions of licence and other
requirements imposed on other general interest PPV services. Astral
contended that Shaw did not make a minimum commitment with respect to
the ratio of French-language to English-language channels to be offered
on its terrestrial PPV service. Astral also stated that Shaw did not
propose to abide by a requirement to remit all gross revenues derived
from the broadcast of Canadian French-language feature films to the
distributor and providers, with a minimum of 60% to the programming
providers, a requirement that is imposed, by condition of licence, on
the Canal Indigo services. Further, Astral argued that the ratio of
Canadian to non-Canadian French-language events proposed by Shaw is much
lower that the ratio imposed on other comparable PPV services and that
Shaw should be required to maintain a 12:20 ratio for Canadian to
non-Canadian French-language events. |
|
16. |
The DGC did not oppose the proposed method
of calculating annual gross revenues. However, the DGC, AMPIA and ACTRA
opposed Shaw’s request for an amendment to its condition of licence that
would reduce its required expenditures on Canadian programming. In their
view, approval of the proposal would result in a significant loss in
funding for Canadian independent production. The DGC and AMPIA also
submitted that Shaw’s request for national distribution should only be
approved if it agrees to maintain its current requirements with respect
to investments in Canadian film production. |
|
17. |
The DGC contended that the cases referred
to by Shaw are different from the present case and should not be cited
as evidence to justify Shaw’s request to reduce its contributions
to Canadian programming. The DGC submitted that the Commission approved
the previous applications because those particular licensees were
operating new services and experiencing significant financial difficulties.
Furthermore, in the DGC’s view, the circumstances regarding Shaw’s
terrestrial PPV service have not changed since 1999 when the Commission
denied a previous request to reduce the licensee’s Canadian programming
expenditures requirements, in Licence for "Home Theatre"
pay-per-view television service amended and renewed, Decision
CRTC 99-43, 26 February 1999,
on the grounds that the licensee had not demonstrated that any financial
harm would result from maintaining the existing condition of licence
and that approval of the proposal would have a significant negative
impact on Canadian programming. |
|
18. |
In its intervention, Rogers, the licensee
of the national English-language terrestrial PPV sports/specials service
known as Rogers Sportsnet PPV, indicated that it neither supported nor
opposed Shaw’s requests. Rogers, however, commented that, if the
Commission were to approve Shaw’s requests, the Commission should also
be favourably disposed to approving any future application by Rogers to
amend the licence for its PPV service in order to provide it with
authority to operate a general interest PPV service that would include
the distribution of feature films. |
| |
Licensee’s replies
|
|
19. |
In response to Astral, Shaw submitted that
the intervener did not provide any detailed financial projections
to support its claim that the distribution of Shaw’s terrestrial PPV
service on a national basis would have a negative financial impact
on Viewer’s Choice and Canal Indigo. Shaw also noted that Astral had
raised similar concerns in its opposing intervention to an application
by the partners of Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership1
(Bell ExpressVu) for a new national terrestrial PPV service,
which was approved by the Commission in New national terrestrial
pay-per-view service, Decision CRTC 2000-737,
14 December 2000. In addition, Shaw pointed out that Bell ExpressVu’s
terrestrial PPV service is not subject to any restrictions that limit
it to providing its service to small BDUs, and that Bell ExpressVu,
which is a direct competitor with Shaw in providing terrestrial PPV
services, did not oppose the national distribution of Shaw’s terrestrial
PPV service. |
|
20. |
Shaw submitted that, in Public Notice 2000-172,
the Commission established an open and competitive licensing regime
for national terrestrial and DTH PPV services as well as VOD services
that compete directly with PPV services. Shaw further noted that,
in Call for applications for a broadcasting licence to carry on
a national general interest pay television undertaking, Broadcasting
Public Notice CRTC 2005-6,
14 January 2005, the Commission called for applications for new
national general interest pay television undertakings that would compete
with the existing pay television services. |
|
21. |
Shaw maintained that approval of its
request for authority for national distribution would provide its
terrestrial PPV service with regulatory and competitive parity with
other PPV licensees that are authorized to offer their services on a
national basis, and result in competitive benefits to BDU PPV affiliates
and their subscribers. |
|
22. |
In response to the concerns raised by
Astral regarding the proposed condition of licence regarding
French-language programming, Shaw made commitments to maintain a ratio
of one French-language channel to three English-language channels and to
remit 60% of its gross revenues earned from the exhibition of
French-language films to the programming providers. It noted that these
commitments are consistent with the requirements imposed on Bell ExpressVu’s
terrestrial PPV service. However, Shaw submitted that Bell ExpressVu’s
terrestrial PPV service is not subject to a requirement to abide by a
12:20 ratio for Canadian to non-Canadian French-language events.
Accordingly, Shaw did not agree to maintain such a ratio in this regard. |
|
23. |
In response to the concerns raised by the
DGC, AMPIA and ACTRA regarding the proposed amendment to its Canadian
programming expenditure requirements, the licensee submitted that,
while the Commission has amended the original contribution formulas
of other licensees seeking competitive equity, Shaw’s terrestrial
PPV service’s current contribution formula has not changed since it
was originally imposed in Decision CRTC 90-78,
5 February 1990, which authorized the operation of the service
on an experimental and temporary basis. According to Shaw, the formula
reflects the Commission’s concerns in 1990 that a PPV service might
draw revenues away from general interest pay television networks and
consequently reduce their contributions to Canadian programming. Shaw
contended that such a situation did not occur and that the policy
concerns on which the existing contribution formula is based are therefore
no longer valid. |
|
24. |
Shaw also pointed out that its terrestrial
PPV service is the only PPV or VOD service that is subject to a
condition of licence requiring that, over the course of the licence
term, it invest in the production of Canadian films, the greater of
$2.4 million or a 30% share of the gross revenues derived from the
exhibition of feature films and events distributed by the BDU affiliates
of the PPV service. Shaw further maintained that its contributions to
Canadian programming are the highest proportional contribution among all
PPV and VOD licensees. |
| |
Commission’s analysis and determinations
|
| |
Request for national distribution
|
|
25. |
In Public Notice 2000-172,
the Commission reaffirmed that its approach is to foster fair competition
and an increased reliance on market forces. The Commission considers
that granting Shaw the authority to offer its terrestrial PPV service
across Canada will enable the licensee to be fully competitive with
other PPV services that are licensed to operate on a national basis.
Furthermore, in the Commission’s view, authorizing the national distribution
of Shaw’s terrestrial PPV service may enable the licensee to generate
more gross revenues and consequently increase its contributions to
Canadian program production. Accordingly, the Commission approves
the request by Shaw to amend the broadcasting licence for its
terrestrial PPV programming undertaking in order to authorize its
distribution across Canada. |
|
26. |
In accordance with the commitments made by
Shaw in its application and in its response to Astral’s intervention,
the Commission is imposing conditions of licence with respect to
the minimum levels of French-language programming, minimum percentages
of Canadian programming, minimum ratios of French-language to
English-language channels, and requiring the licensee to remit 60% of
the gross revenues earned from the exhibition of French-language films
to the programming providers. The conditions of licence are set out in
the appendix to this decision. The Commission considers the foregoing
conditions of licence are sufficient and that it is, therefore, not
necessary to impose a 12:20 ratio for Canadian to non-Canadian
French-language events on Shaw’s terrestrial PPV service. |
| |
Request to amend Canadian programming expenditure requirements
|
|
27. |
The Commission notes that the licensees of
all other terrestrial and DTH PPV services are subject to conditions of
licence requiring that they devote 5% of their annual gross revenues to
the funding of Canadian independent production. The Commission considers
that, in the interest of competitive equity, it is appropriate to impose
a condition of licence on Shaw’s terrestrial PPV service requiring that
it devote 5% of its annual gross revenues to Canadian independent
production. While this condition of licence will reduce the licensee’s
required contributions to Canadian programming, it will enable it to
achieve parity with other PPV services. Accordingly, the Commission
approves the licensee’s request to amend its condition of licence in
order to be allowed to reduce its Canadian programming expenditures
requirements to 5% of its annual gross revenues. |
|
28. |
At the same time, the Commission notes that
the methodology currently used by the licensee for calculating its gross
revenues is consistent with the Commission’s treatment of other
terrestrial and DTH PPV licensees. Although the Commission has deemed
gross annual revenues for affiliated VOD undertakings to be 50% of the
total retail revenues received from customers, it has not applied this
definition to any terrestrial or DTH PPV service. In practice, gross
revenues for terrestrial and DTH PPV services are deemed to be the
programming service’s total revenues, as reported in the licensee’s
annual returns. The Commission finds that it is appropriate to require
the licensee to maintain its current method of calculating its gross
revenues for the purpose of this condition of licence. |
|
29. |
In light of the above, the Commission is
imposing a condition of licence, as set out in the appendix to
this decision, requiring the licensee to devote at least 5% of its
annual gross revenues derived from its PPV broadcasting activities to
one or more independently-administered Canadian production funds, to
support the development of Canadian programming. The licensee’s annual
revenues must be calculated on a basis that is consistent with its past
practices, as described in paragraph 9 above. |
| |
Adult programming
|
|
30. |
In Industry code of programming standards
and practices governing pay, pay-per-view and video-on-demand services,
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2003-10,
6 March 2003 (Public Notice 2003-10;
Industry code of programming standards), the Commission approved and
announced a new code in order to more effectively address the broadcast
of adult programming on pay, PPV and VOD services. |
|
31. |
The Commission notes that Shaw included a
copy of its internal policy on adult programming as part of its licence
renewal application, as contemplated in Public Notice 2003-10. |
|
32. |
The Commission expects the licensee to
adhere to its internal policy on adult programming. Further, the
Commission is imposing a condition of licence, as set out in the
appendix to this decision, requiring the licensee to abide by the
Industry code of programming standards. |
| |
Offering programs in packages
|
|
33. |
Consistent with the Commission’s approach
set out in Public Notice 2000-172,
the Commission expects that, with the exception of the events programming
identified in the paragraph below, the licensee will only offer programming
packages where the total period during which the programming is to
be viewed does not exceed one week. |
|
34. |
The Commission recognizes that some
packages of events programming, such as seasonal sports or a Christmas
concert series, make attractive programming packages that naturally
continue longer than one week and that such programming is particularly
appropriate for PPV television services. For this reason, the Commission
will not apply the limitation of one week to packages that are
exclusively comprised of events. The Commission, nevertheless, expects
that the events programming will be limited to the events themselves and
not include "wrap around" programming that would tend to give the
package the characteristics of a specialty service. |
| |
Cultural diversity
|
|
35. |
The Commission expects the licensee to
endeavour, through its programming and employment opportunities, to
reflect the presence in Canada of cultural and racial minorities,
Aboriginal peoples, and persons with disabilities. The Commission
further expects the licensee to ensure that the on-screen portrayal of
such groups is accurate, fair and non-stereotypical. |
| |
Employment equity
|
|
36. |
Because this licensee is subject to the
Employment Equity Act and files reports concerning employment equity
with the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development,
its employment equity practices are not examined by the Commission. |
| |
Service to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing
|
|
37. |
The Commission is committed to improving
service to viewers who are deaf or hard of hearing, and has consistently
encouraged broadcasters to increase the amount of closed captioned
programming they broadcast. The Commission generally requires all
broadcasters to offer a minimum percentage of closed captioned programs. |
|
38. |
In the present case, Shaw made a commitment
to close caption 90% of all English-language programming beginning in
the first year of the new licence term. The licensee also made a
commitment to close caption 90% of all French-language programming by
the end of the new licence term. The licensee indicated that it would
adhere to these commitments by conditions of licence. |
|
39. |
Consistent with the Commission’s general
approach and with the licensee’s commitments, the Commission is imposing
conditions of licence requiring the licensee to close caption at
least 90% of all English-language programming aired during the broadcast
year, beginning no later than 1 September 2006, and at least 90% of all
French-language programming aired during the broadcast year, beginning
no later than 1 September 2009. The conditions of licence are set out in
the appendix to this decision. |
|
40. |
The Commission expects the licensee to
focus on improving the quality, reliability and accuracy of its closed
captioning, and to work with representatives of the deaf and hard of
hearing community to ensure that captioning continues to meet that
community’s needs. |
| |
Service to persons who are blind or whose vision is impaired
|
|
41. |
The Commission is committed to improving
the television service available to persons with visual impairments
through the provision of audio description and video description (also
known as described video). |
|
42. |
Shaw stated that its PPV programming is
digitally encoded and distributed to digital set top boxes. It explained
that the hardware and software involved in this digital system is not
yet capable of supporting the delivery or reception of audio description
and video description, or of providing access to a secondary audio
programming channel. |
|
43. |
The Commission has noted Shaw’s comments
regarding the challenges it faces in providing service to persons with
visual impairments. Nevertheless, consistent with the Commission’s
general approach to service to persons who are blind or whose vision is
impaired, the Commission expects Shaw to: |
| |
- provide audio description (defined as the provision of basic
voice-overs of textual or graphic information on screen) wherever
appropriate;
|
| |
- acquire and broadcast the described versions of a program wherever
possible; and
|
| |
- take the necessary steps to ensure that its customer service
responds to the needs of viewers who have visual impairments.
|
| |
Bell Canada’s intervention
|
|
44. |
In its intervention, Bell Canada raised a
concern with respect to the 5:1 rule set out in section 18(14) of the
Regulations. Under this rule, Class 1, Class 2 and DTH BDU licensees
must distribute at least five unrelated Category 2 services for each
related Category 2 service it distributes. For the purpose of this rule,
a Category 2 service includes any PPV service, the distribution of which
started on or after 1 February 2001. Bell Canada’s concern stems from
the fact that Shaw’s PPV service launched prior to that date and is
therefore not subject to the 5:1 rule. In Bell Canada’s view, this gives
Shaw’s terrestrial PPV service a competitive advantage over other PPV
services that are subject to the 5:1 rule. |
|
45. |
In response, Shaw submitted that
Bell Canada’s concern is not related to the present application, but
rather to the applicability of the Regulations. Shaw maintained that
there is no basis for applying the 5:1 rule to its service and that the
present application is not the proper process to raise this issue. |
|
46. |
The Commission notes that the Regulations,
including the 5:1 rule, were adopted following an extensive public
process. The 5:1 rule, which also applies to VOD services, was
established to ensure that new, unrelated services would be treated
fairly by distributors. Given that Shaw’s PPV service was distributed
prior to 1 February 2001, the Commission is satisfied that it is
appropriate that it not be subject to the 5:1 rule. Furthermore, the
Commission is not persuaded that it is necessary to review this
provision of the Regulations. |
| |
Conclusion
|
| 47. |
On the basis of its review of this licence
renewal application, the Commission renews the broadcasting
licence for Shaw Pay-Per-View Ltd.’s national, English-language general
interest terrestrial pay-per-view programming undertaking, from 1
February 2006 to 31 August 20102.
This short-term licence renewal will enable the Commission to next
consider the renewal of this licence at the same time as the licence for
Shaw’s DTH PPV service. |
| 48. |
The licence for Shaw’s terrestrial PPV
service will be subject to the conditions specified therein and
to the conditions set out in the appendix to this decision. |
| |
Secretary General |
| |
This decision is to be appended to the
licence. It is available in alternative format upon request, and may
also be examined in PDF format or in HTML
at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca
|
| |
Appendix to Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2006-23
|
| |
Conditions of licence
|
| |
1. The service shall consist of programming drawn from categories 6
(Sports), 7 (Drama and comedy) and 8 (Music and dance), but shall also
include programming from all the categories set out in Item 6 of
Schedule 1 of the Pay Television Regulations, 1990, as amended
from time to time.
|
| |
2. In markets where a bilingual service is offered, the licensee
shall maintain the channels in a ratio of French to English of 1:3,
with a minimum of 5 French-language signals in addition to the
French-language barker channel.
|
| |
3. With respect to English-language programming, the licensee
shall, through its agreements with the operators of licensed or exempt
terrestrial broadcasting distribution undertakings, ensure that in
each broadcast year, the following is made available by these
licensees to their PPV subscribers:
|
| |
a) a minimum of 12 Canadian feature films (including all new
Canadian feature films suitable for PPV exhibition that meet the
Industry code of programming standards and practices governing
pay, pay-per-view and video-on-demand services);
|
| |
b) a minimum of 4 English-language Canadian-based events; and
|
| |
c) the following minimum percentages of Canadian programs: 5%
of feature film titles, and 20% of all program titles other than
feature films.
|
| |
4. With respect to French-language programming, the licensee shall,
through its agreements with the operators of licensed or exempt
terrestrial broadcasting distribution undertakings, ensure that, in
each broadcast year, the following is made available by these
licensees to their PPV subscribers:
|
| |
a) a minimum of 20 Canadian feature films in the original
French-language version, or dubbed in French, which have been
exhibited in theatres in French-language markets (including all
new Canadian feature films suitable for PPV exhibition that meet
the Industry code of programming standards and practices
governing pay, pay-per-view and video-on-demand services);
|
| |
b) a minimum of 12 French-language events; and
|
| |
c) the following minimum percentages of Canadian programs: 8%
of feature film titles, and 20% of all program titles other than
feature films.
|
| |
5. The licensee shall ensure that both English-language and
French-language Canadian feature films are scheduled, repeated and
promoted in the same manner as non-Canadian feature films.
|
| |
6. The licensee shall contribute at least 5% of its annual gross
revenues derived from its PPV broadcasting activities to one or
more independently-administered Canadian production funds, to support
the development of Canadian programming, provided that these funds
meet the criteria set out in Contributions to Canadian programming
by broadcasting distribution undertakings, Public Notice
CRTC 1997-98, 22 July
1997, as amended from time to time. Contributions shall take the
form of monthly instalments, to be remitted within 45 days of month’s
end, and representing a minimum of 5% of that month’s gross revenues.
|
| |
7. The licensee shall remit to the rights holders of all
English-language Canadian films and two Canadian-based events per
year, 100% of the gross revenues earned by the licensee from the
exhibition of these films and events. With respect to French-language
Canadian feature films, the licensee shall remit 100% of the gross
revenues earned by the licensee from the exhibition of these films to
distributors and providers, with a minimum of 60% to the programming
providers.
|
| |
8. The licensee shall not enter into an affiliation agreement with
the licensee of a terrestrial broadcasting distribution undertaking,
unless the agreement incorporates a prohibition against linkage of the
licensee’s service with any non-Canadian discretionary service.
|
| |
9. With respect to English-language programming, the licensee shall
provide closed captioning for not less than 90% of all programming
aired during the broadcast year, beginning no later than 1 September
2006.
|
| |
10. With respect to French-language programming, the licensee shall
provide closed captioning for not less than 90% of all programming
aired during the broadcast year, beginning no later than 1 September
2009.
|
| |
11. The licensee shall adhere to the Pay Television Regulations,
1990, as amended from time to time.
|
| |
12. The licensee shall adhere to the guidelines on gender portrayal
set out in the Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ Sex-role
portrayal code for television and radio programming, as amended
from time to time and approved by the Commission. The application of
the foregoing condition of licence will be suspended as long as the
licensee remains a member in good standing of the Canadian Broadcast
Standards Council.
|
| |
13. The licensee shall adhere to the Industry code of
programming standards and practices governing pay, pay-per-view and
video-on-demand services, as amended from time to time and
approved by the Commission.
|
| |
14. The licensee shall adhere to the Pay television and
pay-per-view programming code regarding violence, as amended from
time to time and approved by the Commission.
|
| |
For the purpose of the above conditions of
licence, "broadcast year" means that period between 1 September in any
year and terminating the following 31 August. |
| |
Footnotes:
Bell
ExpressVu Inc. (the general partner), and BCE Inc. and 4119649 Canada
Inc. (partners in BCE Holdings G.P., a general partnership that is the
limited partner), carrying on business as Bell ExpressVu Limited
Partnership
|
