OTTAWA-GATINEAU – The CRTC said Friday that Shaw Communications was not giving itself an undue preference when denying full pay-per-view service to Telus and it’s yet-to-be-launched digital television service, Telus TV.
Telus filed a complaint in November 2004 saying that Shaw Pay-Per-View was saying it would limit the movie titles made available to Telus TV – which therefore means Shaw has given its PPV and cable divisions “undue preference” and subjected Telus to an undue disadvantage, said the western telco.
Shaw, on the other hand, claimed agreements with certain U.S. movie studios prohibit it from making programming available to a “telco network” due to copyright concerns. However, a DSL network is no more or less secure than cable or satellite distribution networks.
Also disconcerting for Telus is that Shaw PPV has a regional monopoly as the only terrestrial pay-per-view supplier west of Ontario. Without pay-per-view from Shaw, Telus would have to turn to Bell ExpressVu, which has a national PPV license. Telus could also even use its own VOD license as its PPV service to customers. The telco told Commissioners it wanted to be able to offer all its main competitor has – and that means having all of Shaw PPV.
Telus demanded that either it have access to all of the same pay-per-view programming that Shaw Cable has or “if Shaw PPV demonstrates that its agreements with U.S. program rights holders prohibit it from providing their programs to Shaw PPV affiliates that distribute PPV programming using DSL technology, the Commission should prohibit Shaw PPV from providing such programs to any BDU affiliates, including Shaw’s BDUs, until such time as Shaw PPV amends those agreements to ensure equal access by all BDUs to the same programming,” said the Telus complaint.
In its response, Shaw said it was skeptical of the seriousness of Telus’ interest in distributing the Shaw PPV service and that, while it would welcome business from Telus, Shaw PPV was uncertain that it would be practical or realistic for Telus to become a Shaw PPV affiliate, given the fact that Shaw’s BDUs and those of Telus are direct competitors.
“The Commission is not persuaded by Telus’ arguments that it should be entitled to offer, through Shaw PPV, PPV programming that is exactly the same as that offered by its BDU competitors in western Canada,” reads the decision. “Rather, the Commission considers that Telus has other adequate alternatives that would permit it to offer a competitive PPV service. There is, however, nothing on the record of this proceeding to indicate that Telus has explored these alternatives.
“Based on the foregoing, the Commission concludes that there is insufficient evidence on the record to sustain a finding of undue preference and/or undue disadvantage. The Commission therefore dismisses the complaint by Telus Communications Inc.”
-Greg O’Brien
www.crtc.gc.ca
