CASBAA’s 2015 Survey of OTT TV and Pay TV Broadcasting Policies in Asia CASBAA Policy Roundtable Executive Session Monday, October 26 th, 2015 John Medeiros,

CASBAA’s 2015Survey of OTT TV and Pay TV Broadcasting

Policies in Asia

CASBAA Policy RoundtableExecutive Session

Monday, October 26th, 2015

John Medeiros, Chief Policy OfficerJanine Lapworth, Senior Consultant

CASBAA Members

Membership by Sector

*Includes agencies, consultancies, law firms, and research companies.

37%

20%14%

15%

14%

Channels/Content ProvidersSatellite Operators & Service ProvidersPlatformsTechnology/Hardware/SoftwareOther *

2015 Survey

• CASBAA engaged with Knowledge Partners in 17 Asian jurisdictions and the 2 benchmark jurisdictions of the United States and the United Kingdom.

• Investigated and reported on regulation of pay television and “over-the-top” television in each jurisdiction.

2015 survey outputs

• Wallchart of pay television regulation• Online summaries of pay television and over-the-top

television regulation, by jurisdiction (with comparison tool): available at http://www.casbaa.com/rfg

• Print publication with summaries of pay television and over-the-top television regulation, country reports and analysis: forthcoming

• Online summaries of advertising regulations for pay television and over-the-top television, by jurisdiction: forthcoming

“OTT TV”

• Catch-up for local pay/FTA services• Linear online simulcasts of local pay/FTA channels• Video embedded in websites such as online newspapers and

periodicals, official websites for local TV services• Transactional video on demand, eg. iTunes• Subscription video on demand, eg. Netflix• International live streaming services with subscription revenue

base, eg. willow.tv• International video services with advertising revenue base, eg.

YouTube• International services sharing pirated content, eg. Popcorn Time

APAC Internet Traffic

2014Gaming

Business

Consumer Data

Consumer Video

File "Shar-ing"

Source: Cisco VNI

2019

GamingBusinessCons. DataCons. VideoFile "Sharing"

Since the last review (2012) ...

• No new licensing regimes. • Still generally-applicable content prohibitions, plus

regulation ranging from strict to self-regulation to no formal regulation.

• Still generally applicable advertising prohibitions in most jurisdictions and otherwise, advertising self-regulation common. Internet advertising less constrained.

• Mushrooming piracy. Some site-blocking but not enough to manage the threat.

Since the last review (2012) ...

• Operators “getting on with it”, with introduction of numerous new services across the region, in spite of (not because of) regulatory environment:– Uncertainty (paper vs practice)– legitimate/local OTT TV services vs

illegitimate/offshore OTT TV services– pay TV services vs OTT TV services

OTT TV: paper vs practice

• “Cosmetic regulation” on paper. • In reality – often, no enforcement mechanism

for offshore OTT TV services, and even if there is a theoretical mechanism, little or no enforcement action actually taken.

• Applies to both media regulation (eg. content) and IP rights protection.

Legitimate/local OTT TV vs illegitimate/offshore OTT TV

• Legitimate local OTT TV operators disadvantaged in competition with:– Pirate and other illegitimate sites (eg.

pornography)– International sites which are in practice not

subject to same rules• Result of unfair competition: – Barrier to entry for new services– Some services failing due to unfair competition

Pay TV vs OTT TV

• “Traditional” pay TV operators even further disadvantaged (in terms of their pay TV platforms and, at times, on their OTT TV platforms) compared with new, third-party OTT TV operators, including:– licensing and rate regulation– content rules (local content quotas, scheduling ,

censorship)– advertising rules (minutage restrictions, “Made in ...”

requirements) – program supply (content sharing, a la carte rules)– constraints on foreign investment

Pay TV vs OTT TV – a comparative continuum

Pay TV regulation

OTT TV regulation

Singapore? South Korea? Vietnam?

Light Strong

CambodiaMyanmarSri Lanka

Hong KongJapanNew Zealand

AustraliaMalaysiaPhilippinesSingaporeSouth KoreaThailand

IndiaIndonesiaTaiwanVietnam

China

Light Strong

CambodiaHong KongIndonesiaMyanmarPhilippinesSri LankaTaiwanThailand

IndiaJapanNew Zealand

Australia Malaysia

China

For the regulators

• OTT TV – further “onshore-only” regulation likely to have unintended detrimental consequences for legitimate local operators.

• Pay TV - consider whether legacy regulatory environment still necessary and appropriate given the wide availability of unregulated media. (And don’t make matters worse, with big new tilts in the playing field!)

For the regulators

• IP enforcement against pirate websites will make it easier for legitimate operators to compete by discouraging both supply and consumption of illicit content:– Effective legal framework, targeting not only

businesses but, where appropriate, consumers– Active enforcement by government and industry– International cooperation– Consumer education

For the regulators

• For content regulation, in addition to alternatives to broad government regulation (such as industry self-regulation), consider non-regulatory approaches: – technological solutions (filters/parental controls) – consumer education and assistance (“trusted

sites” lists/”trusted channel” lists)

THANK YOU