Section 2: EPG and enabling access for content and service ...

1

Section 2: EPG and enabling access for content and service providers In reply to the BBC Trust request to provide more detailed information in relation to the Electronic Programme Guide (EPG), pay services and related functionality this note seeks to clarify the positions briefly set out in the initial proposal. Further work has been undertaken since the NSA to explain the need for a consistent Canvas core UI and to explore the flexibility offered to content providers, manufacturers, ISPs, pay platform providers and other third parties. Detailed descriptions of the likely relationship between Canvas JV and content and service providers are set out in the business rules which illustrate how Canvas aims to maintain an open and fair environment. This note also aims to respond to the questions stakeholders have asked via the Trust’s consultation and contains information which is as developed as possible to allow a proper consideration of the issues raised. 2.1 The NSA Application

The application stated that ‘by specifying a UX as part of the Canvas technical specification, the BBC will be able to guarantee a high quality, simple to use environment that is navigable by all audiences and which conforms with best practice in terms of accessibility (i.e. for the hard of hearing, partially sighted) and editorial guidelines – protecting vulnerable audiences with pin protection and content labelling where appropriate’ (Section 8.2, Quality and Impact, NSA Application). The UX (UX) refers to the complete software including the look and feel and navigational environment, and underlying technology. The application also stated that Canvas would offer ‘a simple consistent and dynamic UX that is capable of being updated and personalised’ and that it ‘aims to include a common Electronic Programme Guide (EPG).’ It considered that a common guide would be subject to Ofcom’s code, which requires fair reasonable and non-discriminatory treatment of channels wishing to be placed on the guide. Therefore, it did not analyse this element of the Canvas standard. It also set out the possibility of on demand guide listing fees for the broadband content services supporting the cost recovery mechanism for Canvas following the model set by Freesat (Annex 2, Cost Recovery, NSA Application). The submission stressed the intended openness of the platform environment as a key point of difference (‘a standards based open environment’) and described how the platform would be open in a number of areas:

Open to users of all access providers (ISPs) Open to all devices which can integrate the software specifications and UX Choice to the consumer through open access to all content providers who adhere to

technical, editorial and UX standards Allowing 3rd party developers the opportunity to enhance the usability of the platform

It also stated that a benefit of the proposition for the supply chain was the ‘potential to generate revenue in a commoditised market’ while content providers could monetise using advertising (Section 3.3, Partnerships, NSA Application). The Application implied that content owners would be able to earn subscription, pay per view and other pay revenues as a result of bringing broadband to the TV set. However, it did not discuss in detail the platform requirements necessary to enable this.

2

Similarly, the submission did not deal with the issue of conditional access although the Trust Consultation stated ‘manufacturers may choose to incorporate conditional access functionality to allow access to paid-for television or other services. In these cases additional subscriptions may be required to access paid-for or premium content’ (Section 2.7.2, Content). 2.2 Stakeholder responses Many of the responses to the Trust’s consultation were supportive of Canvas and recognised the significant benefits of a simple, easy to use experience. However, there was a need for detail about the guide and UX (i.e. look and feel). In particular, some respondents asked why it was necessary for the Canvas standards to include a guide and to specify a common user experience All respondents highlighted the importance of fair and reasonable access on the Canvas guide to give emerging and community content providers easy access rather than allowing domination by major existing services. Some agreed that a simple experience which would help users locate content easily is essential and the accessibility elements of Canvas were supported. While it was agreed that it was reasonable for Canvas to specify (objectively justifiable) functionality requirements and a consistent approach to navigation, there were questions around Canvas determining the ‘look and feel.’ Virgin Media suggested that a mandated guide and UX would put the Canvas JV partners in a position of editorial control, which they may then exploit in favour of their own services. Some respondents felt Canvas could do more in this area towards its aims of supporting openness and innovation. Google suggested that metadata for the guide should be made available to all publishers and equipment vendors and that this should not be based on a commercial relationship with Canvas. Top Up TV asked that the source code for the guide software is made available to 3rd parties allowing them to modify and incorporate it within their own products and services. A wide range of respondents questioned the proposal’s lack of clarity over monetisation options and the requirements necessary to deliver these. Many respondents, including Pact, said that Canvas should accommodate different business and revenue models. Miniweb argued that an absence of a payment mechanism would undermine the ability of Canvas to offer valuable services and that a weak revenue model would also increase costs for the consumer. Top Up TV commented on the need for Canvas set top boxes to support conditional access. In anticipation of Ofcom’s Pay TV proposal that Sky makes premium channels available on wholesale access to non-DTH platforms (on which Ofcom is currently consulting) and the need for some HD content rights owners to have encryption to prevent piracy and unauthorised reception, Top Up TV argued that CA should be included. However, they argued that the Canvas standard should not prescribe a CA technology but should include the minimum requirements in its technical specification. Informitv.com also agreed that CA should be available to authorise access, targeted advertising and rental, retail or subscription payment models. 2.3 Summary of further information Through this further information, we set out why a consistent approach to the UX is fundamental first to ensuring that the benefits of connected television services are understood and enjoyed by all audiences and secondly to the ambition to democratise access to the living room screen for all content and service providers, ensuring a wide range of services are available.

3

We believe that a consistent UX is necessary to create a successful platform of meaningful scale for reasons set out below (see section 2.5 for more detail). At the same time we recognise needs of content providers, device manufacturers, platform operators and ISPs and want to create a flexible approach that supports their business models and still delivers the benefits described above. In order to retain this flexibility in a horizontal market but also the benefits set out above we are proposing a “thin” core UI managed by the Canvas JV with each content provider, manufacturer, etc. able to develop sub-sections of that UI. This is set out in more detail in section 2.6, with a summary of the flexibility offered to each stakeholder set out in section 2.7. We also seek to make clear the ambition that Canvas devices should support a wide range of monetisation options, including targeted advertising, micropayments and subscription and how these would be supported, including the approach to conditional access, Digital Rights Management (DRM), data management and billing. The response balances the intended consistency and openness of the platform and unwillingness to become a gatekeeper or a competitive bottleneck with the need to support multiple business models (set out in sections 2.8 & 2.9). 2.4 Some defined terms It is clear that from the responses that the term “EPG” is understood in different ways by different organisations and that in proposing “a common Electronic Programme Guide (EPG)”, without being more specific, the original NSA has raised concerns. In the interests of clarity this note will refer to the following defined terms: Canvas User Experience (UX):

the interactions between a user and a Canvas device, which will encompass sections managed by the Canvas JV, content providers, manufacturers, and ISPs

Canvas Core User Interface (Core UI):

the subset of the User Experience which is managed by the Canvas JV. This is described in greater detail in section 2.6.

This response will in general avoid the term “EPG” except in the legal sense of a TV guide requiring an Ofcom EPG licence. 2.5 Why does Canvas need a consistent approach to the user experience? The Canvas partners believe it is essential that the proposed Canvas venture take a role in defining and managing a user experience (UX) to access content on any Canvas device. In order to repeat the success of Freeview the Canvas platform must attract a wide range of content providers and be adopted by a large number of people, two objectives which are mutually reinforcing. A consistent UX will be vital to ensure they are met for a number of reasons, Specifically:

1. Reducing barriers to entry for content and service providers, stimulating innovation and choice and democratising access to the television screen

2. Underpinning a consistent consumer brand to protect scale in the horizontal market for device manufacturers and advertisers

3. Ensuring the benefits of connected television are understood and enjoyed by all audiences The rest of this section will address each of these in more detail:

1) Reducing barriers to entry for content and service providers, stimulating innovation and choice and democratising access to the television screen

4

Internet connected devices create the opportunity for a step change in the range and diversity of services available via the television screen. The Canvas UX, coupled with common technical standards and basic rules on access and prominence will mean that all Canvas devices can be addressed as a single platform by content providers, with the UX ensuring fair access and prominence. The flexibility and scale of this environment will stimulate the development and delivery of the widest range of content and services. The fact that a large number of users can be easily accessed will be particularly important for free content services (whether commercial or licence fee funded). This will be achieved by ensuring that services can be developed for Canvas devices with commonly available web tools. This provides real flexibility for content and service authoring. A common environment will make it simple for content and service providers to publish quickly to a wide range of devices at low cost and give them the ability to adapt the consumer proposition quickly as consumer demand dictates. Canvas will also support other content authoring tools, such as MHEG. IP connectivity makes it possible to introduce a range of monetisation models, including advertising, micropayments and subscription. These will be enabled by a position on DRM, conditional access and data management (as summarised below) within the Canvas specification. This enabling approach allied with Canvas’s simple business rules and open approach will ensure that Canvas creates valuable opportunities for content and service providers. This is particular true when compared to the increasingly fragmented ‘broadcast plus’ environment typical of the current wave of hybrid DTT devices.

2) Underpinning a consistent consumer brand to protect scale in the horizontal market for device manufacturers and advertisers The success of the horizontal market in the UK to date has been a function of consistent branding (eg. Freeview) standing for access to a range of services. The Canvas proposal is intended to protect and build on this ambition. The UX is fundamental to the consumer promise and the ability of the DTT platform to continue to offer an integrated service portfolio, seamlessly bringing together linear, on demand and interactive content. Without it, there is little saliency to the Freeview brand, as on-demand and interactive services will be adopted ad hoc by device manufacturers with no overarching brand promise. Maintaining this consistency will enable broadcasters and now ISPs to promote a single standard and offer (via a horizontal market) the scale so crucial for advertisers, with new opportunities for targeted advertising and related opportunities. Without it, there is a risk of fragmentation, followed by concentration of supply within DTT which in turn will lead to competitive bottlenecks, gatekeepers and the dilution of the basic Freeview premise of a simple, free alternative to pay TV.

3) Ensuring the benefits of connected television are understood and enjoyed by all audiences The Canvas proposal has been developed to meet the needs of the mainstream UK audience, with no dependency on an understanding of sophisticated technology. The proposition is designed to ensure that all audiences have access to a simple and effective means of discovering content, including those unwilling or unable to pay for subscription TV services. In this way, a consistent UX is critical to the BBC’s ambitions to diminish the barriers, both real and perceived, confronting audiences seeking to access new technology, and

5

flows directly from the delivery of the BBC’s sixth purpose, to deliver the benefits of emerging technologies. The BBC and Canvas partners are also committed to ensuring that the Canvas experience is aligned with best practice for accessibility, an area where the managed user interfaces of some pay platforms have been better than many Freeview devices in the past. Canvas will ensure that any implementation of the user experience protects these requirements, and will be the first digital TV platform to ensure connectivity for specialist third party assistive technologies.

2.6 Proposed approach to the user experience and EPG The philosophy underlying the Canvas user experience aims to provide consumers with simple access to a wide range of content, while at the same time giving content providers a high degree of control and flexibility with regard to how their content is presented. This is a fundamentally different approach to other TV platforms where the user experience usually enforces a high degree of consistency across the whole platform with relatively little flexibility for content providers, and where editorial control by the platform operator is exercised in order to benefit not only users but also the commercial objectives of the pay platform operator. We believe that the approach to the design should be principle based and flow from the public purpose objectives of the overall Canvas project. These might include:

• Simple: designed for the mainstream audience rather than the early adopter • Integrated: seamlessly bringing together broadcast and broadband distribution

technology in a way that is invisible to the user

• Familiar: building on accepted norms (channel listings for example) and with consistent navigation

• Light touch / unintrusive: as little intervention as necessary to allow audiences to

get quickly to content and service areas

• Personal: capable of being adapted by the user, to give prominence to selected content and with multiple routes to content

The core user interface managed by Canvas As a result of this approach the Canvas venture will control only certain “core” elements of the user interface with relevant areas controlled by third parties. The following diagram gives a high level illustration of how various sections of the Canvas user experience might operate and current thinking in terms of how control is delegated away from the Canvas JV:

6

Figure 1: diagram summarising structure and ownership of the UX on a Canvas branded device

GuideOn Demand TV Web/Interactive

content Settings

Linear TV/Radio

EPG

Search/browse all shows

Search/browse directory

Canvas Settings

Recordings

Device settings

ISP settingsBBC iPlayer

ITV Player

4OD

Demand five

BT Vision

Sky Player

User favourites

“More Episodes

”etc.

User Favourites

Main Menu

Guide On-Demand TV Web/Interactive Settings

BBC News

flickr

Tate guide

etc.

RecordingsFind

Etc.

Sony interactive service

Sony content service

The elements under the control of the Canvas joint venture, referred to as the Canvas Core UI, are explained and illustrated below. All screenshots are for illustration and intended to be indicative only:

1) A main menu

or top level experience (probably reached by pressing the ‘menu’ button on the remote control or similar). This will provide options to enter other sections of the interface in order to find content, change settings, etc.

Figure 2 – example screenshot showing main menu over live TV

Indicativ

e Only

Controlled by Canvas JV

Controlled by service provider

Controlled by Canvas/DMOL/Freesat

Controlled by user

Key

Controlled by manufacturer

7

2) A simple linear guide for TV and radio with integrated PVR functionality (e.g. mark

programmes for recording). This is primarily a rendering of the existing Freeview/DMOL or Freesat guide with three main enhancements:

– Channel providers will be able to enhance the information about their programmes

in the guide. For example a channel operator could provide links to more episodes of a particular show so that on-demand content can also be accessed from the linear guide. There is also the potential for linking to web apps from programmes or even related linear programming (with options to set up recordings etc.)

– Additional linear channels may be delivered via broadband (rather than broadcast).

These would sit alongside broadcast channels in the canvas guide. This would ensure a seamless experience between broadcast and broadband content. The Canvas JV and/or channel provider would coordinate with DMOL/Freesat with regard to the logical channel number (LCN) for the channel

– New functionality to access on-demand content – a guide that goes backwards as

well as forwards in time for example.

Figure 3 – example screenshot showing linear TV guide with on demand links (illustrative)

3) An ordered list of on-demand services providing an entry point to the various content provider services:

– Canvas would provide a functionality to search/browse programmes (across all

content providers) as an alternative entry point. In order to facilitate this there would be common metadata standards for on-demand content.

– It will be possible to link directly to individual on-demand programmes from the

linear guide (as described above) and from interactive/web content.

Indicativ

e Only

8

Figure 4 – example screenshot showing on demand guide (illustrative)

4) A basic search & browse functionality for other content (i.e. web/interactive content /

applications):

– Users will be able to use a range of filters to search for content (e.g. most popular, by category defined by content provider metadata etc}

– Users will be able to choose which content has prominence by selecting “favourite”

services. Figure 5 – example screenshots showing web service navigation (illustrative)

5) Basic canvas level settings (e.g. options around parental controls that are the same on all

Canvas devices). Other areas of functionality settings may be specific to the device and would be determined and controlled by the manufacturer.

Indicativ

e Only

Indicativ

e Only

9

2.7 Flexibility provided to 3rd parties

Canvas aims to provide unprecedented flexibility to content providers with regard to the presentation and promotion of their content – just as they have when building their own web sites. This flexibility will encourage innovation by content providers as they compete to offer new features that either improve the service for viewers (so they use it more) or provide new ways of commercialising content (e.g. cross promoting subscription services or selling display advertising).

Flexibility for content owners

Of course some content owners (such as smaller production companies) may wish to present their content to users via an intermediary, as they do on the web today, and they would be free to do so. The intermediary could be one of many things, including an existing aggregator (e.g. Joost, Virgin, iTunes, Top Up TV), a broadcaster operated service (e.g. 4OD), or a new service created to take advantage of Canvas. In order to achieve this there will be a transition from the Canvas core UI (described above) to a UI that is controlled by each content provider (or aggregator) supplying on-demand services. Within this space they can design their own user interface (both the underlying structure, and the look and feel). Where a piece of content is discovered through a find/browse functionality in the Canvas core UI, content providers would control the step in the user journey immediately prior to (and immediately after) watching a piece of on-demand content. In the case of commercial content, this could be a payment page or advertising. An example of a customised on demand user interface is shown in figure 6. There will be a similar level of flexibility for third party web/interactive applications which work on a Canvas device. If these third parties chose to perform some of the guide functions for linear & on demand TV via apps, they will be free to do so (subject to existing regulation of EPGs by Ofcom). Likewise if 3rd parties wish to provide advanced search functionality across web/interactive content via apps this would also be possible. Canvas would provide UX guidelines for content providers to encourage a consistency across different services, for example the same navigational grammar in terms of how the buttons on the remote correspond to menus, sub menus, etc. Most of these guidelines will be optional, with the mandatory elements intended to be limited to exiting apps and triggering core Canvas functionality from within apps (e.g. bringing up the main menu). Figure 6 – example screenshot showing bespoke Demand five and Lovefilm interfaces (illustrative)

Indicativ

e Only

Indicativ

e Only

10

Flexibility for device manufacturers

Large parts of the Canvas technical specification will be available for use by manufacturers whether or not they deploy the Canvas UX (potentially as part of the DTG DBook 7). This gives the manufacturer the choice to deploy the Canvas UX or not, while still benefiting from a standard based approach. Such devices would be ‘own branded’ and in these cases the manufacturer would liaise directly with content providers regarding the terms of prominence and delivery of their services to the device and any other commercial terms (in a similar manner to other TV platforms). The ambition for the Canvas UX is for it to be included as the default UX for audio visual content on a range of devices that would carry the Canvas brand. Manufacturers who create such Canvas devices will still have a high degree of flexibility to enable them to differentiate their products with additional features (on top of the minimum Canvas specification). Manufacturers would have the same flexibility as all content providers to create bespoke on-demand or interactive services that could be accessed from their devices. They can also (with Canvas) make some changes to the appearance of the core UI providing that any such changes: o Maintain the interoperability and appearance of content provider services on the platform o Ensure the core UI remains updatable (over IP) for all Canvas devices without a large

amount of cost and/or complexity o Provide all accessibility functionality available as part of the Canvas core UI The venture partners acknowledge that meeting these conditions will limit the nature of changes to the core UI any particular manufacturer can make and we look forward to engaging with manufacturers to explore ways in which this could work in practice. As Canvas is a minimum specification, it could be available on multi-function devices, manufacturers could also develop user experiences for functions other than TV. One option being explored is a prominent slot on the main menu controlled by the manufacturer and used for access to device specific functionality (e.g. integrated DVD or Blu-ray player). The technical feasibility and desirability of this approach will need to be tested with the industry.

Flexibility for ISPs and platform operators

We have investigated ways in which ISPs and other parties who support Canvas devices might reflect this in the UX. If the ISP was running a content service they would have the same flexibility to design that service as all other content providers (described above). Where an ISP is also involved in providing a Canvas device there may be additional flexibility as described above for all device manufacturers. There would also be potential audience benefits in a main menu “shortcut” to ISP services (such as online billing and customer support, or even audio-visual services) and our discussions with ISPs to date suggest this is desirable for those who are supporting Canvas – in particular to deal with customer service issues. The mechanism for allocating such a “shortcut” will be part of a published Canvas JV policy that also encompasses device manufacturers (discussed above). The screenshot below is illustrative, but indicates how for example an ISP or platform operator might brand a Canvas guide and have dedicated prominence for access to their services, for

11

example as a route through to pay services, in addition to their incorporation into the main sections of the guide or on demand sections. Figure 7 – example screenshots showing ISP prominence linking to ISP service (illustrative)1

Flexibility for users

As described above, we expect the UX to be customised by audiences, for example to include favourite channels, or to ‘bookmark’ favourite destinations, for example by displacing or adding to menu items on the main menu. Customisation of look and feel of the core UI, especially for reasons of accessibility will also be allowed where technically feasible 2.8 Approach to pay services We are supportive of third parties running a wide range of pay services on Canvas and the responses to questions below set out in some detail how we suggest Canvas enables and supports a range of monetisation and pay TV opportunities over IP. These include 1. Rental (pay per view and micropayments). Canvas would support pay per view models and

we have had initial discussions the viability of micropayment models and have committed to work with teams leading this work to understand how Canvas can support the relevant functionality. The provision of billing services would be a matter for third parties and we discuss this approach in the responses to questions at Annex 1.

2. Subscription over IP. As an IP connected platform, Canvas would support the range of pay

services available over the web and we recognise the hardware requirements necessary to facilitate this, including a DRM solution. The approach to these matters is described in the responses to questions in Annex 1.

In addition to payment over IP, Canvas would also seek to support conditional access (CA) technology widely used for pay TV services. Our preference would be a situation where every Canvas device is CA enabled and we set out a detailed response in the answers to questions below, but in principle:

• We believe that CA enabled boxes improve the range of services available to audiences, within the consistent user experience proposed and with scope for pay providers that subsidise devices to reflect this in prominence for their services

1 Orange disclaimer: The inclusion of any Orange trademark or other intellectual property on this page should not be interpreted as (i) agreement or support (explicit or otherwise) from Orange in relation to the BBC Trust's assessment of Project Canvas; (ii) agreement from Orange that it will participate in the commercial launch of Canvas; or (iii) approval (explicit or otherwise) of the way in which the Canvas service (including but not limited to its EPG) may be represented graphically

Indicativ

e Only

Indicativ

e Only

12

• We would in any event encourage pay platform providers who wish to support Canvas to work with manufacturers to create CA enabled devices

• We have looked at the options for creating CA upgradeability within the Canvas core

specification. An upgradeable CA device solution, which enables the CA supported to be flexed over time has been cited by stakeholders as desirable. We recognise the potential benefits of such options and note that while such a solution has never been achieved before, given sufficient resourcing, the technical challenges to doing so are not insurmountable. However, the key concerns here are in relation to interoperability between CA systems and the requirement for the platform operator to manage access. This therefore poses the risk that Canvas becomes a “gatekeeper” and careful consideration would be needed to mitigate this risk. As more progress on such a solution is made, the Canvas venture will therefore continue to consider this option as part of the longer-term Canvas roadmap but does not believe it is appropriate for a 2010 launch product.

2.9 Approach to user data and targeting/personalisation The use of any internet or on-demand service generates usage data. Content providers are often required to collect such data in aggregate (for example in order to determine rights payments) and often use this data at an individual level for the purpose of providing personalised or targeted recommendations. The Canvas partners have a strong interest in ensuring good measurement and Canvas has engaged with BARB to ensure that Canvas devices are well suited to measurement by that organisation. Where Canvas is involved in collecting (or facilitating the collection of) VOD data it proposes to use measurement methodologies consistent with the Broadband Measurement Working Group (BMWG) where possible. Canvas will collect usage data in order to provide features such as “top 10 most viewed” and a content provider will always be able to access detailed reports for the data generated by their service (on a cost recovery basis). Canvas also intends to make aggregated data available to all canvas content providers (and potentially other interested 3rd parties), but content providers will have full control over how much (if any) aggregated data about their service is made available to others. There are also potential benefits from the use of individual level usage data by content providers to provide personalised services (such as recommended content or more relevant advertising). The Canvas JV would seek to enable content providers to provide such services, whilst remaining in strict compliance with European and UK data protection laws. Users would have the ability to opt out of any such personalised services that are facilitated by the Canvas JV. In order to provide correctly regionalised services the Canvas JV would collect postcode information from users, but no other user information would be requested. Users may optionally submit further user information (e.g. in order to set up parental controls) on an opt-in basis, generally where there is a clear benefit to the user in doing so. The usage of this data by Canvas would also be covered by data protection laws (as above) and Canvas would publish clear terms and conditions about how it could be used. Third parties providing services on Canvas may already have other information about users of their service (e.g. from usage of existing web service with the same login, or account data acquired as an ISP). In these instances the third party would be free to make use of this data in their service (subject to relevant laws) with no involvement by Canvas.

13

Appendix 1 – Response to BBC Trust’s request for further information The following table directly addresses the questions regarding the Electronic Programme Guide and Access to Canvas as raised in the ‘Information Request Following Canvas Stakeholder Consultation’. The responses reflect information given in the main body of the paper.

Information Request Response 2.2 Stakeholders have raised a number of concerns over a lack of detail in relation to how the Canvas joint venture will design, manage and make available the Canvas EPG and how this might depart from the approach taken in respect of other platforms such as Freeview. In particular, stakeholders have asked a number of questions, under the following headings: Control and Design a) Who will design and

operate the EPG? b) What control will the

Canvas JV exercise over the EPG?

The overall framework for the (user experience) UX , including the guide, will be designed by the JV, with significant flexibility within this framework. The levels and areas of flexibility are set out in response to subsequent questions (in particular 2.4b) and described in section 2.5 above.

c) Will box manufacturers be able to specify their own EPG?

Yes (but not the order of listing of linear television channels) however for the Canvas trade-mark to be awarded the ‘Canvas’ UI will need to be the default. There will also be scope for manufacturers to ‘own’ aspects of the look and feel of the Canvas UI, subject to retaining the ability to update the UI across different deployments over IP. See also 2.4

d) Will a preference toward the Canvas JV partners be exercised in respect of EPG positioning?

No. Full details on access and prominence are set out in the response to questions on business rules, below.

e) Will the EPG feature both linear and non-linear services?

Yes, the Canvas core UI will cover both linear and non-linear audiovisual services as well as interactive applications. The seamless integration of content delivered by broadcast and broadband is a key benefit of the proposed approach.

f) Will parental controls Yes, Canvas will support parental controls and which will be

14

be developed and overseen?

based on information contained in content metadata supplied by content providers, allowing parents to set up pin protection for content they deem to be inappropriate.

g) How will content and metadata be managed?

Each content provider will use their own content management system (as they do on the web), but the Canvas JV will support a centrally coordinated metadata system that will enable users to search & browse content from multiple content providers.

b) Linear channels may optionally submit metadata to Canvas that will allow their content to be discovered by Canvas level search/browse of content.

c) On-demand TV services must submit certain levels

of metadata about each content item for the same reason.

d) Content providers creating web/interactive content

will submit metadata about each “app” to allow it to be listed correctly in the “app directory” but Canvas will not store any further metadata about content within each “app”.

h) Will there be full accessibility from launch (such as text to speech) for the blind, visually impaired and older groups, and those with learning disabilities?

i) Do these considerations extend to the usability of the set top box and EPG?

The BBC and partners are still gathering functional requirements and welcome further engagement with relevant bodies in this area as appropriate. We have already undertaken that the Canvas core UI will be optimised to ensure an accessible and usable experience for the widest possible audience. To achieve this there are several work streams identified within the project requirements. These include ensuring the core technology is able to deliver broadcast access services as standard, as well as work streams looking at optimising the experience for the vision impaired and on the access requirements of people with cognitive disorders such as; ADHD, Dyslexia or high functioning autism. The JV is doing everything possible to ensure these features will be available to audiences as soon as possible and will publish a roadmap for their timely deployment. Best practice and innovation on the core device will deliver the necessary reasonable adjustments BUT this may not however meet the requirements of all people dependent on assistive technologies. As such Canvas will be the first DTV platform that is designed specifically to provide enough connectivity between specialist third party assistive technologies and the core UI. Implementing accessibility features within their content (e.g. subtitles, audio-description) will be the responsibility of individual content providers, in line with the requirements of Ofcom’s Access Services Code.

j) Will DMOL handle Canvas would follow the channel numbering set out by

15

disputes among providers, as it does on DTT?

DMOL for DTT and Freesat for DSat, so disputes will be handled by these bodies. DMOL and Freesat are already considering how linear content delivered via IP will be integrated into existing channel listings.

k) Is it anticipated that the EPG will be required to be licensed by Ofcom under Part 3 of the Communications Act 2003 (broadcasting), as well as being regulated under Part 2 (networks and services)?

Yes it is anticipated that the linear guide will require an Ofcom EPG licence. The initial advice we have received suggests that on demand and web/interactive content sections of the Canvas UI are not anticipated to require an Ofcom EPG licence, though they may still be regulated in other ways by Ofcom (e.g. under AVMS). This understanding is based on the current draft of the Communications Act and we will engage with government and Ofcom on the detailed implementation of the AVMS directive in UK law

Business Rules a) What are the

intended prominence and listings rules?

The initial view of the proposed Canvas venture partners is: that: – For linear DTT and DSat channels prominence will be

determined by existing DMOL/Freesat guide numbers. – Where IP delivered linear channels and on-demand

services seek to join the platform simultaneously an objective measure of allocating listings will be used (for example, but not limited to, the reach of services). Otherwise, it is envisaged that listings will be allocated on a first come, first served basis once the service is up and running (as with many other guides), potentially within genre categories or a similar consumer facing ordering. The Canvas JV would retain the right to periodically review the UI (including the ordering of services) in order to ensure it delivers the best UX, but all changes would be on the basis of an objective measure.

– For web/interactive content users would be given the

option to browse all content (ordered by objective measures, e.g. categories, alphabetical, most used) and select which “apps” they wish to have prominence in their own UI.

b) If a fee structure for listing is used who sets the fee structure and who will ensure it is fair, reasonable and non discriminatory?

c) How will fees be set and levied on different kinds of content providers?

We have agreed to charge a fee on a cost recovery basis and the level of this charge will be confirmed later. The intention is to apply the same fee to all content providers for equivalent services on a ‘cost recovery’ basis. It is anticipated that there will be different fees that reflect the different cost bases for IP-linear channels, TV on-demand services, and different types of web/interactive content. The intention is to enable a wide range of content and therefore any fees aim to cover venture costs in relation to ensuring technical compliance and protecting the overall

16

integrity of the platform.

Access a) On what basis will the

EPG, if at all, be made available to third parties?

The Canvas UI, will be made available to any 3rd party that produces devices meeting the Canvas specification. It will potentially be linked to a Canvas trade mark licence agreement

b) Will the JV make available the source code and allow third parties to adopt, modify and commercialise, if so, to what extent?

Section 3 sets out our proposal that the JV could, subject to the DTG’s ability to work successfully towards a timely roadmap, ensure that future DTG D-Books contain a ‘Canvas chapter’ outlining the core UI. This would be subject to a Canvas Trademark Licence. It would therefore in future be openly available to those wishing to deploy accredited Canvas devices, although the specific source code of the Canvas core UI would not be made generally available. As per section 2.6 of above, Canvas will enable flexibility for different categories of third parties: – Content and service providers will have significant

flexibility to adapt the look and feel, structure and business models within their own area

– ISPs and other platform operators will be able to add

branded points of entry on the main UI and adapt the overall look and feel

Where business models for third parties can be facilitated via the internet there will be complete flexibility and the canvas specification will be developed to support other requirements of billing (unique box ID, DRM etc) which are discussed in subsequent responses. No third party content or service provider will have independent control of the prominence between services.

c) Will the Canvas JV prescribe the look, feel and branding of the EPG? If so, what is the degree of flexibility?

The Canvas JV will determine the look and feel of the core UI and may allow users to customise this to a certain extent (e.g. for accessibility reasons). The Canvas partners have also proposed that 3rd parties will be permitted some ISP, platform or manufacturer co-branding on the Core UI (e.g. Canvas powered by Talk Talk, Canvas from Top Up TV, etc.) as suggested in Section 2.6, but the exact terms on which this will be offered are yet to be agreed (NB any such customisation of the Core UI would not involve changes to the Ofcom licensed EPG for linear channels) Within a content providers area (e.g. BBC iPlayer) the content provider will have full flexibility to alter their own interface (look, feel and branding) subject to basic guidelines (e.g. on the functionality of certain remote control buttons).

17

–

Overall EPG Strategy The application notes that ‘the venture would operate in a way that is entirely consistent with Freeview - i.e. a horizontal market. As with Freeview, the venture would also encourage third party service providers to evolve the new standard.’ How does the proposed EPG strategy sit with this statement?

We set out above (in section 2.5) how a common branded user environment that enables easy access to a wide range of content and a unified broadcast and broadband experience will serve to protect a unified horizontal DTT market that otherwise risks fragmenting into a number of proprietary VOD and interactive services, each with a proprietary gatekeeper. By ensuring that there is significant flexibility within and outside the core UI (see above, sections 2.5 & 2.6), Canvas creates an environment that will enable innovation by content and service providers and is intended to encourage a thriving developer community. We expect such innovation to push the boundaries of the specification and require ongoing evolution – similar to the innovations in HD that have required the evolution of the DTT specification, albeit likely with more incremental effect enabled by software upgrades.

2.3 Some stakeholders have asked on what basis the Canvas EPG would be made available to third parties. Some stakeholders would like to understand the extent to which they can adapt the EPG to fit their own commercial models. Platform or service providers have also expressed concern that they do not understand the level of control Canvas will exercise over the EPG.

The specific questions are addressed below in response to questions 2.4 and 2.5 and the overarching rationale is covered in sections 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7 above.

2.4 On the assumption that the

18

Canvas joint venture will develop a default EPG for all Canvas enabled devices, the relevant questions may be: a) To what extent will

third parties be able to adapt the EPG for their own commercial purposes?

As described in section 2.5, the JV will retain control of the overall UX framework and business rules to ensure that it complies with its duties as an EPG licensee under Ofcom rules, to allow the JV to maintain a consistent environment for content and service providers and to enable the JV to update the UX efficiently over IP. However, within the overall framework there will be significant scope for flexibility for: • Content, service and application providers in terms of

design of their areas of the EPG and commercial models • ISPs and platform operators who wish to offer a

branded version of the UX • Device manufacturers who want to reflect their own

look and feel, subject to the JV maintaining the ability to update the UX over IP

Details are set out in section 2.6 above.

b) Can third parties develop their own EPG to work within a Canvas specified device?

There are a number of third parties with scope to implement their own branded environment as part of or in addition to the core Canvas UX. These split into three: • The scope within the overall Canvas UX for content,

service and application providers to develop their own areas, subject to JV business rules and navigational grammar as set out in sections 2.5 & 2.6 above

• The scope for ISPs and platform operators to offer

branded versions of the Canvas UX where they are the device retailer. Or for device manufacturers to influence the overall look and feel of the Canvas interface, also set out in section 2.6 above

• The ability of device manufacturers to implement their

own alternative, though not replacement, guide. However, the Canvas trade-mark will only be offered where the Canvas UX is the default UX. Devices will also necessarily have their own functionality (for settings, for non AV services) which we expect to be separate,

19

but could be incorporated within the Canvas UX with the agreement of manufacturers.

We note that any 3rd Party UI may need to comply with UK regulation and could require an Ofcom EPG licence

c) Can third parties retail a Canvas enabled device but replace the default Canvas EPG with their own EPG?

See above. The device can have its own UX but the Canvas trade mark will only be awarded to devices that have the Canvas UX as its default.

2.5 Access by third parties to the Canvas default EPG a) Will Canvas provide

the source code and relevant technical specifications to facilitate a third party’s ability to reconfigure the default EPG?

b) If the Canvas JV agrees to allow third parties the ability to adapt the EPG, how would this process be implemented and within what timeframes?

c) For example, would it seek to oversee/approve such adaptation?

d) What standards or elements of the technical specification supporting the EPG are required by third parties to enable them to reconfigure the EPG according to their own commercial requirements?

e) What is the minimum level of technical functionality required

For the purposes of this question, we have assumed that the reference to ‘third parties’ means either device manufacturers or other parties seeking to brand and retail Canvas compliant devices (i.e. platform operators such as TopUpTV or Virgin Media) a) Canvas will allow third parties to modify the core UI as

set out in 2.4b above, however this will not extend to releasing the source code.

b) The JV would expect to publish technical and brand guidelines for device and other platform operators c) The JV would need to oversee such adaptation to ensure

that the UX remained capable of being updated over time, otherwise it will not be capable of evolving to support the needs of content and service providers

d) We would expect these would be set out as part of the

Canvas specification document

e) See above

20

by third parties to implement this option?

f) Are there any standards which will be proprietary to Canvas? If so why? Please specify.

g) Will third parties have access to any proprietary standards?

h) Please specify whether, and at what point in the development of the Canvas specification, the BBC will release the technical information to allow third parties to develop alternative EPGs which are compatible with the overall Canvas specification.

i) If Canvas wishes, for any reason, to limit the degree of flexibility in relation to access to the EPG what commercial rules will the JV apply to determine the appropriate level of flexibility?

f) This is covered in section 3: agreement of Canvas specification, however the Canvas ambition is to have recourse to proprietary standards only where no other option exists and where the licensing framework is open to any provider

g) See f) above

h) This is covered in section 3 i) This is covered above, however broadly the JV will seek

to protect: • Its duties as an EPG licensee under the Ofcom code • The ability to update any EPG over IP to maximise the

capability of the overall experience as technology and software develops

2.6 Alternative provision of third party EPGs There are a number of potential options to allow device manufactures or alternative platforms to either offer their own EPG alongside the default Canvas EPG or replace the default Canvas EPG with their own:

21

• Option 1: Alternative EPGs alongside the default EPG • Option 2: Replacement of default EPG with third party EPG Has the Executive considered these options and, if so, what are its general views on the implications of each in the context of its proposal?

As described, our approach is broadly consistent with Option 1. The strategic rationale for a consistent (default) UX is described in section 2.5 and our detailed approach is set out in response to question 2.4. As stated, option 1 is the only approach that enables a consistent promise to the user (i.e. the Canvas brand or trade mark is associated with the UX, so this must be the default) and which is operationally feasible, both for the Canvas JV and for all content providers who will need to integrate with the UX and who benefit from the ability to update it.

Also, for each option please answer the following questions: a) Will set top device

manufactures be able to retail devices, such as set top boxes or IDTVs which utilise the Canvas software but which also contain an alternative non-Canvas EPG?

b) What are the current technological issues which might make it difficult to implement this option? Please specify.

c) Is there any reason to suspect that this assessment will change due to actual or potential developments in hardware or software capability over the next five years? If so please specify.

d) Are there any other current or future operational or commercial issues which make the implementation of this option difficult or otherwise unattractive?

a) See 2.4b – the logic is consistent across STBs and IDTVs

b) The technological complexity is summarised above in the assessment of the options

c) It is possible that the technical landscape will change over a five year period, however the choice of this option is also a strategic choice, based on the need for a consistent consumer proposition, as set out in section 2.5 above

d) The position of the Canvas JV will need to evolve over time in a fast moving market. We would seek to protect the principle of a common, recognisable environment for users for the reasons outlined above

2.7 Consumer

22

Choice Alternatively, the Canvas joint venture may consider allowing consumers the ability to reconfigure the EPG according to their own preferences. For each of the following questions please set out whether Canvas will enable the following, either at launch or at a later date: a) To what extent will

consumers be able to adapt or personalise the EPG to reflect their particular preferences?

a) Canvas aims to provide users with a range of

customisation options within the core UI. As a minimum there will be accessibility options and an ability to bookmark favourite content in some way. It is likely that these options will evolve as the Canvas venture develops subsequent versions of the core UI. Content providers will be free to innovate within their own UI (i.e. the BBC will control the level of personalisation within BBC iPlayer)

b) Are there any plans to allow consumers the ability to download software to adapt the Canvas EPG?

c) Will consumers be able to download alternative EPGs?

b) With an open environment it is possible that developers may create applications that provide enable functionality as well as content or services. The level of access these “apps” have to the underlying hardware capabilities of the set top box will be determined by the Canvas JV.

c) Consumers will not be able to download alternatives to the Canvas core user experience.

3.1 The application states that Canvas offers ‘significantly lower barriers to entry for content providers, allowing anyone with a website access to a Freeview audience (subject to clear editorial standards).’ This has prompted the following questions from stakeholders: a) What is the minimum

technical specification required to support access to Canvas by content providers?

a) For linear broadcast services, no further work would be

necessary as the Canvas specification would build on existing standards, e.g. DBook 6.0 for DTT.

For on-demand and interactive services, the Canvas environment would support authoring in a number of commonly available web tools and provide simple metadata frameworks based on existing industry models. Canvas

23

would also support DRM technology (see below) which would support content providers services. Detail on the authoring technologies and specifications are set out in section 3. Canvas would also offer a ‘software developer kit’ (SDK) to enable content providers without standing capability to quickly integrate their existing web services with the platform, which would include the relevant requirements for technical integration. This would include recommended approaches to how content and services are presented but these would not be mandatory. The JV would also operate a ‘minimum quality threshold’ for content on the platform – the operation of this requirement is covered in Section 1 (Venture) and Section 4 (Distribution)

b) Which content or services may be denied access and why? Who would determine whether access should be denied?

b) Content or services which break UK laws (this would not be determined by Canvas but by Ofcom or a court) will not meet the platform access requirements. In addition linear channels will require an Ofcom licence to gain access to the linear section of the Canvas EPG. Canvas would publish its approach which would be based on the JV ensuring compliance with relevant regulatory and legal obligations.

c) Would this be made

clear before customers purchase a box or are supplied with a box?

c) It would be clear the device did not offer full internet browser functionality and it is likely a list of available core services would be used in marketing the box.

d) What are the criteria the JV proposes content providers need to fulfil to gain access to the platform?

e) How would the

criteria be drawn up and revised?

d) While a significant amount of ‘business rule’ work has been undertaken to ensure that Canvas is as open a platform as possible (see above), the detailed list of criteria has not yet been drawn up but it will be intended primarily to comply with any legal obligations on Canvas as outlined above. These would not be editorial criteria per se and would relate only to technical integration, the integrity of the platform (no bugs) and / or application of the laws of the land. e) Further to the answer to d) above the criteria, and any subsequent revisions, will be drawn up by the staff of the JV and approved by the board.

f) What appeal process would be instituted for providers of blocked content and who would oversee that process?

f) We would expect this to be a matter for the JV with recourse through the usual legal channels on an ex ante basis – the JV would not seek to block access to the platform other than on the FRND basis described above.

3.2 In addition to ex ante regulation of access there might be

24

on-going editorial issues which arise once access has been granted. In the application, access to Canvas is subject to ‘clear editorial standards.’ In response, stakeholders have raised the following concerns: a) Who will determine,

apply and enforce the editorial standards?

b) How will JV regulate non linear content?

Linear TV services will continue to be regulated by Ofcom, any service without a licence will not appear in the linear section of the Canvas UI Non linear content services will be subject to the terms and conditions of the platform as described in the answer to 3.1, above which will reflect the prevailing legal frameworks in this area which are still being finalised (see below).

• A breach of these terms will result in an escalation procedure that could result in a suspension or removal of the service from Canvas

• Compliance with the terms of Canvas will be the responsibility of content providers who must operate suitable “take down” procedures etc.

• The Canvas JV would act if a content provider was failing to carry out its legal obligations

c) Which content would

be covered by the AVMS directive?

d) Will such content be regulated in parallel by whoever controls editorial standards for the Canvas joint venture and the regulator for AVMS?

c) The AVMSD has yet to be implemented into UK law and therefore, it is difficult to state exactly how it will be applied in practice to each and every type of content.

o Linear services will clearly be covered under existing rules and are the responsibility of channel operators

o On-demand TV will likely be covered (provided it satisfies the AVMSD criteria) and content service providers will be responsible for compliance

o Some web/interactive services may be covered particularly if they are designed to accompany programmes which are themselves regulated

d) If a content service is in breach of its Canvas contract then Canvas would initiate the escalation procedure set out in that contract. If the regulator for AVMS finds a service to be in breach of UK law then this would likely be a de-facto breach of the Canvas contract

e) Without a controlling stake in Canvas, how can the BBC determine minimum editorial standards?

The BBC would not have (or seek) the ability to enforce its own editorial standards in relation to third party content and service providers, however the JV would have controls as described above.

25

See also section 1, which covers governance and the protection of the BBC’s public service ambitions.

5.5 In the application you raised the prospect of using push VOD to offset the potential capacity or load issues faced by broadband network providers. Some stakeholders have identified a number of issues relating to the implementation of a push VOD service by the Canvas JV. In particular, the fact that there are capacity issues and potential bottlenecks in relation to the volume of content which can be pushed as well as the volume of content which can be stored on the PVR a) Will the JV mandate

minimum memory requirements for STBs to enable push VOD?

a) Yes, there will be a minimum storage requirement defined to enable network load offsetting. Initially this will be met using a small “hidden” section of a PVR hard disk, but in time it could also be fulfilled using solid state memory

b) On what basis will the Canvas JV determine which broadcasters will push content?

c) What process will be implemented to review this policy and when will review occur?

d) What criteria will be used to determine what content is pushed and will it be limited to content owned or distributed by the Canvas JV partners? Or could it be overridden by viewers or 3rd party push VOD service providers?

b) As the project has evolved, the aims of the push VoD functionality have narrowed to focus on offsetting the potential load on the broadband network rather than a consumer facing service. As a result, consumers would not be aware of the source of content at the point of playback. The intention is for the content selected to represent those shows which will relieve the most traffic from the broadband networks (especially at peak times when bandwidth is most contended). Our analysis (as included in the original submission) suggests that a significant proportion of network load can be offset with a small volume of off air recording

c) The exact process is yet to be determined but in principle the Canvas JV would monitor which programmes generating the most views on Canvas and select the providers of these programmes for participation in the Push-VOD delivery (as long as they are technically able to participate)

d) We recognise the requirement for this to be a totally objective measure and there will be no special treatment for Canvas JV partners. In future the Canvas JV may seek to optimise the mitigation by personalising push VOD delivery depending on a user’s viewing habits, but again this would be invisible to the user. 3rd parties could not change the

26

selection for the Canvas IP mitigation push VOD, but could run their own (consumer facing) service (see e), below).

e) Does the Canvas JV envisage that a third party platform, not part of the JV, but which decides to utilise the Canvas software would be able to market a set top box with its own push VOD capability? What are the technical issues which might constrain this?

e) Yes. As with Freeview the Canvas specification is a minimum standard and 3rd parties can add functionality. Such a third party service would not make use of the “hidden” canvas storage, but could make use of other storage capacity (either another hidden section, as with Sky Anytime, or the users section of the hard disk, as with Top Up TV).

NB This application should not rule out any of the proposed JV partners offering such a service, however this would be on the same terms as any other third party and subject to any prevailing regulatory processes.

f) Is a broadband connection required to activate the push VOD service you envisage? If so what is the rationale for this approach?

f) Yes. IP is required to ensure effective triggering of recording. It is possible for such triggering to be enabled over broadcast however this is complex and given that the proposed push VOD functionality is only intended to reduce IP traffic from popular shows, it would seem appropriate to deploy an IP based system.

The Canvas JV would of course review this position with regard to any technical or market developments.

g) Will Freeview HD+ products include push VOD?

g) This is a matter for Freeview shareholders to agree, but the technical and operational challenges of a standalone broadcast push-VOD service would need to be overcome

h) What percentage of capacity, if any, will be reserved for non-PSBs?

h) No capacity will be reserved for either PSBs or non-PSBs. It will be allocated based on IP traffic mitigation

i) Will content be pushed via DTT or broadband?

i) The intention is to record content directly from original broadcast (DTT or DSat), but off-peak broadband delivery could be considered at a later date it this were found to be an alternative that delivered better value for money for content providers and ISPs

5.6 Stakeholders have questioned how Canvas devices will support conditional access (CA): a) Does the Canvas JV

intend to mandate conditional access for all set top boxes?

b) What are the latest plans in terms of the extent to which

a) Canvas will not mandate a specific CA system as part of the specification, but we are exploring two routes towards CA enabled Canvas devices. This is discussed further in section 2.8 above. b) At the least, manufacturers will be free to include a system of their choice in collaboration with platform vendors. As long as the device meets other Canvas

27

Canvas devices are intended to be CA compatible?

c) Are there plans to ensure that the devices are capable of being upgraded for CA subsequently via a software download?

d) Will the Canvas specification stipulate generic CA hooks?

e) What are the incremental costs of providing support for pay models?

specification elements (including the UX as default for TV functionality) it will be able to carry the Canvas trade-mark. This is consistent with the approach taken by Freeview today.. c) An upgradeable CA device solution, which enables the CA supported to be flexed over time has been cited by stakeholders as desirable and we have engaged in initial technical research which suggests technical feasibility, albeit subject to further discussions with other parties. The JV partners key concerns are in relation to interoperability between CA systems and the requirement for the platform operator to manage access in this model. We are completing further investigation to understand both of these issues but this is emerging technology with relatively few live implementations. d) If an upgradeable solution are genuinely generic and accepted by all major CA industry participants then Canvas will seek to include them in the canvas minimum spec. e) Including CA will add some hardware and integration costs to manufacturers (and therefore ultimately to consumers). The hardware costs are believed to be low and the software integration costs will not be mandatory under the proposed Canvas model.

5.7 Stakeholders have asked the following questions regarding digital rights management (DRM): a) Which DRM will be

specified? b) How will JV specify

Breach Response c) What security

features will Canvas deploy to ensure access to home equipment and data networks is secure?

d) Who will manage delivery of encrypted content and will the Canvas standard have sufficient capabilities to ensure this is possible?

The JV partners recognise that a commercial DRM will be necessary to allow Canvas devices to support the widest range of content, in particular pay per view and subscription access to premium film and other content. The specification will include rights protection for both streaming content (where common standards are well recognised) and for downloaded content, where a choice of DRM will need to be made. Procuring a DRM solution is an important commercial decision which requires full due diligence. The venture partners felt that prior to BBC Trust approval it would not be appropriate to procure a DRM solution, but also acknowledge that content providers need clarity in this area and will seek to reach a decision as swiftly as possible. The venture partner’s ambition in this area is to maximise the range of content available on the platform and minimise technical implementation costs.

28

e) Will Canvas allow different DRMs to inter-operate?

DRM technologies are complex and to facilitate a timely launch it is only intended to include one solution. Further DRM capability could potentially be added by later software upgrades if there was demand from content providers and it was demonstrated to be technically feasible to do this

5.11 Some stakeholders are concerned that the Canvas JV will not operate as a vehicle to facilitate simplified and cost effective interactive payments models for VOD or other services. Stakeholders have asked: a) How will

subscription/PPV/ transaction services operate?

Content providers will be able to operate pay services (subscription or transactional) and can either operate their own payment processing mechanism or sub-contract with a 3rd party payment service provider. The Canvas standard will incorporate the necessary security technology (e.g. https) to enable this.

b) Will specification enable or mandate PPV and micropayments?

c) Would there be a central billing agency run by Canvas?

The Canvas JV will not operate a single billing/payment system itself but we are investigating how Canvas could facilitate between payment service providers and content providers to ensure a simple UX (e.g. by specifying common experiences, storing a users preferred payment provider, ensuring each box has a unique ID) We have had initial discussions with parties investigating a micropayments model and are keen to understand their evolving needs and integrate the necessary elements of the hardware specification. However many aspects of these service do not have any dependency on the Canvas device specification and will be operated solely by the payment operator via standard internet models

5.12 The application states that Canvas provides opportunities for broadcasters ‘to create innovative content and benefit from improved recommendations and advertising targeting.’ This has prompted the following questions from stakeholders: a) Will Canvas prevent

other parties from

The Canvas JV will not operate an ad-serving/targeting system, but will instead provide experiences so that content

29

incorporating technology for additional commercial activities, such as targeted advertising?

b) Ad serving technology is crucial, will Canvas open a hole in its system for content providers to serve ads and, if so, how?

providers can dynamically serve advertising into videos and other content. a) Canvas will not prevent any dynamic serving of adverts, which can be targeted based on whatever information the ad-serving operation has about a Canvas user. More detail on the Canvas Data policy is in section 2.9 above. b) Companies will be free to extend the Canvas video player so that it integrates with their ad-serving solution of choice (just as they do with existing web video players).

6.1 The application states that, ‘as an open technical standard, it is anticipated that Canvas will provide many opportunities for 3rd parties to develop their own propositions and services.’2

This may involve the collection and storage of end user data. Stakeholders have raised the following questions:

• Will Canvas capture users’ details at set up?

• If yes, how will data be stored and used and what measures will be in place to protect it?

See Sub-Section 2.9.

2 Canvas Proposition and Public Value Case, section 7, Partnerships, p.21