Congress
urged not to allow Webcasting
02/21/00- Updated 05:26 PM ET
© 2000 USA TODAY
WASHINGTON (Bloomberg) - Movie studio
and broadcast television company representatives urged a
U.S. House panel to avoid legislation that would let
Internet companies retransmit their TV programs over
their Web sites.
Legislators on the House
telecommunications subcommittee agreed at a hearing that
the U.S. Congress should proceed ''cautiously'' when
considering whether laws are needed to address copyright
issues. Because the Internet has no boundaries, it's
unlike any other mass medium, such as broadcast TV or
cable. That makes it difficult to apply traditional
copyright laws.
Those who want a new copyright law for
the Internet have a ''very high threshold to clear'' to
prove their case, said panel Chairman Billy Tauzin, a
Louisiana Republican. He warned that the issues raised
by iCraveTV.com are ''just the first puff of wind in a
brewing storm.''
''We are not pirates,'' Ian McCallum,
a vice president for iCraveTV, told the panel. Under
Canadian law, he said the company can retransmit
broadcasters' programming on the Internet without
permission and the signals of U.S. stations are
available in Canada.
Licenses
At issue is whether Internet companies
should be eligible for a so-called compulsory copyright
license. Congress passed laws that let cable and
satellite companies carry distant TV stations in return
for paying a small fee per subscriber. Last year, cable
companies paid about $140 million and satellite
providers paid $90 million for those TV rights.
Without the compulsory license,
satellite operators would have to negotiate for the
right to carry every program with every copyright
holder, such as the studios and sports leagues.
Internet companies increasingly see
themselves as competitors to traditional media
companies, so they want the same rights and licenses as
cable and satellite companies.
''How we regulate cable companies in
my view should not automatically extend to Webcasters on
the Internet,'' said Representative Anna Eshoo, a
California Democrat.
Still, TV stations and Hollywood
studios argue that the Internet is different from
satellite or cable TV, and Internet companies shouldn't
be eligible for the compulsory license. Satellite and
cable companies serve specific customers at a designated
time and in a specific region. On the Internet, the
audience is unlimited and a program can be replayed and
redistributed.
''The difference between satellite,
cable and the Internet is the difference between
lightening and a lightening bug,'' Motion Picture
Association of America President Jack Valenti told the
panel. ''All I'm asking you to do is be very cautious
and wary of granting a compulsory license for
everyone,'' he said.
''Broadcasters are not against the
Internet,'' said Paul Karpowicz, vice president of LIN
Television Corp., owned by Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst
Inc. Rather, more than 200 stations are sending the
video for all or part of its newscasts over the
Internet.
Related Links:
Ruling
stops iCraveTV transmissions
Little
Net firm rocks TV giants
TOP
