We recap the inaugural appearance of Professor Michael Geist, law professor at the University of Ottawa and Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law, before the CRTC, in which his statement and answers to the Commissioners' questions maybe revealed more about CRTC assumptions about the public interest and consumer interest than about how much money should go to whom under the new version of the Broadcasting Act.
NOTE : apologies for a mistake about what the Broadcasting Act actually says about affordability. Also, please follow Prof. Geist's podcast: Law Bytes .
We recap the inaugural appearance of Professor Michael Geist, law professor at the University of Ottawa where he holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law and is a member of the Centre for Law, Technology and Society.
Professor Geist was greeted with an incantatory acknowledgment and it just got weirder from there.
We discuss this first public hearing on Canada's new version of the Broadcasting Act, which is the result of Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act, which Prof. Geist appeared before Parliament on, on many occasions. It seems his reputation proceeded him, and the questioning was bizarre and perhaps revealed more about the CRTC's view of viewers and consumers than it did about Prof. Geist's opinions on how much money should go from the "online streamers" to the "Canadian broadcasting system".
The public and consumer interest in broadcasting got a bit of an airing but not much progress appears to have been made despite the new Act and the raising of the consumer interest directly by Prof. Geist.
Much speculation on the role such consumer concerns might play in the first of many decisions to follow ensues, including worries that the consumer interest has not been stated strongly enough. We also discuss the order of the proceeding, which can be viewed as weirdly backwards, perhaps for political reasons.
Advocacy, it turns out, is hard, but hopefully worthwhile, because someone has to make sure this thing works out.