Melon Farmers Blog

Watching UK Censors

Worldwide Censorship…ATVOD told to get their hands off BBC Worldwide service operating from Italian Mediaset platform

Read more ATVOD Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from atvod.co.uk
See Ofcom Appeal Decision re BBC Worldwide [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

ATVOD logo 2011ATVOD responded to Ofcom’s decision to overrule an ATVOD determination that a BBC Worldwide VOD service was subject to ATVOD censorship:

Decision turned on new evidence not made available to ATVOD

An appeal by BBC Worldwide against an ATVOD determination that it was providing an on demand programme service on the Italian Mediaset platform has been upheld by Ofcom.

In order to fall within the scope of the regulations overseen by ATVOD, a service must satisfy a number of statutory criteria, as set out in section 368A of the Communications Act 2003. In 2011, BBC Worldwide asked ATVOD to determine whether its involvement in the provision of programmes made available on demand on the Mediaset platform in Italy constituted provision of an on demand programme service.

The decision turned on whether BBC Worldwide or Mediaset exercised general control over the selection and organisation of the programmes comprising the relevant video on demand service. The ATVOD decision had been taken on the basis of contractual evidence provided by BBC Worldwide following a request by ATVOD for all relevant information.

Ofcom’s decision to uphold the appeal takes into account new evidence from BBC Worldwide which was not made available to ATVOD at the time of its Determination.

Commenting on the decision, ATVOD Chief Executive Pete Johnson said:

This is a complex area and the appeal system is a vital part of the process, giving service providers, in particular, greater clarity over issues such as where regulatory responsibility lies when two or more parties are involved. In this case, it is unfortunate that ATVOD was not provided with all relevant information at the appropriate time – doing so ensures that unnecessary regulatory costs are avoided.

2 May, 2012 Posted by | ATVOD VOD Censor, Ofcom Internet Censor | , | Leave a Comment

Ofcom Announce a Performance Review of ATVOD…An aborted ludicrous flat rate fee structure, rules that suffocate the nascent adult VOD industry, expensive fees just to adjudicate on a handful of complaints. ATVOD will pass with flying colours

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

ATVOD logo 2011Christopher Wollard, group director of Ofcom, has written to ATVOD:

Two years ago, Ofcom designated ATVOD (the Authority for Television on Demand) as co-regulator of editorial content included in on-demand programme services (‘ODPS’).

Paragraph 13 of the Designation says that: The Designation shall be subject to a formal review by Ofcom at the expiry of two years from the date of this Designation taking effect [i.e. 18 March 2012].

We propose to take the opportunity of the formal review of the Designation to take a broader look at how co-regulation is working.

To this end, the terms of the review, which have been agreed by Ofcom’s Content Board, are to:

  • (a) assess whether Ofcom’s tests for co-regulation are still being met, and that ATVOD remains an appropriate regulatory authority
  • (b) consider how ATVOD is discharging the designated functions and whether it is meeting the obligations and conditions
  • (c) identify any issues arising from the co-regulation of ODPS that would merit further consideration
  • (d) consider whether to continue the designation, and if so, whether there are any aspects of the designation that may require amendment

Ofcom are keen to hear from stakeholders, particularly VOD providers. Contributions are invited up until 21st May 2012.

Ofcom expect to announce the results of the review in summer 2012.

27 March, 2012 Posted by | ATVOD VOD Censor, Ofcom Internet Censor | , | Leave a Comment

Protect Us from the Protectors…Ofcom plugging away at the notion that people would like to see TV style censorship applied to the internet

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from ipsos-mori.com
See also Protecting Audiences report [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk
See also Regulation is dead: long live the independent TV viewer? from newstatesman.com

protecting audiencesOfcom commissioned Ipsos MORI to survey audiences to understand attitudes towards content regulation; and how far, and in what ways, the public expects it should be protected in a world where content can be accessed in such a broad range of ways.

The report Protecting audiences in a converged world is based on findings from seven pairs of workshops conducted across the UK, each of which had around 20 participants. Fieldwork took place in June and July 2011.

Key findings include:

  • Protecting minors, and protection from harm, were considered to be the most important areas for future regulation.
  • Offence is very important to some, but not at all important to others.
  • Impartiality, privacy and fairness were usually considered to be relatively less important. But a wide range of views were expressed, depending on whether participants considered the areas to be an important principle to uphold or personally relevant.
  • Knowledge of current content regulation is high for broadcast services, but lower for other services like catch up and VoD (video on-demand).
  • Viewers have high expectations of content regulation on broadcast television, and associated VoD and catch-up services.
  • Other online audio-visual content is seen to be different from broadcasting content and people have generally lower expectations about regulation in this area.
  • Converged TVs and devices, which incorporate broadcast, VoD and open internet services, are considered to be closer to a TV-like experience — and have a higher expectation of regulation — than the open internet. It is particularly important to protect vulnerable people in this environment.
  • Technology use and social attitudes were found to be the most influential factors in influencing people’s views on the future of content regulation.

5 February, 2012 Posted by | Ofcom Internet Censor, Ofcom TV Censor | , , | Leave a Comment

Censorship on Demand…TV Censor suggests that video on demand should be censored more like TV than internet

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from media.ofcom.org.uk

ed richardsEd Richards, the boss of Ofcom made a speech to the Oxford Media Convention on the 25th January 2012.

He repeatedly alluded to more censorship for the internet and video on demand in particular. He said:

In between the twin poles of linear TV and the open internet, it becomes quite interesting.

When something looks, feels and acts like TV, but is delivered over the internet and into people’s living rooms, we need something that meets audiences’ expectations and provides the right degree of reassurance.

It is here that such services intersect with the views and concerns expressed by the participants in our research and where greater assurance than currently on offer may need to be considered.

It seems undesirable for these services to be subject to full broadcasting style regulation — by and large they belong to a different form of service and come from a very different context. But we do need to consider whether to develop the approach in relation to existing co-regulation for video on demand to offer greater assurance and to ensure there is public trust in the approach to regulation as these services become more and more pervasive and significant.

In the case of video-on-demand services, our research shows that protection of minors and the risk of harmful content is the most likely focus. And our experience of broadcast regulation suggests that privacy and fairness for individuals are also areas that need careful exploration.

In this context I wonder therefore whether there may be a fairly simple opportunity to establish a core set of principles and aims which are held in common across a diverse media terrain with different regulatory environments.

Such a set of core principles could be established between the regulators that emerge from the current debate. They might aim to articulate the minimum standards which we would like to see in the UK, regardless of the nature of the service or its specific regulatory setting.

This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. The Ofcom Broadcasting code is remarkably close to the BBC’s editorial guidelines. The PCC Code and the Ofcom Broadcasting Code share many of the same objectives, principles and indeed requirements, although the range of issues in the Ofcom Code is, for obvious reasons, significantly more extensive.

But we take an interest in the debate because over time, and quite quickly in some cases, the difference between video on demand content and that of increasingly video rich digital newspapers may well diminish. In thinking about an approach to media regulation for the next decade or more, it is as well to have an eye on the direction in which the tide is flowing.

More prosaically, we might be able to offer some assistance from what we have found to be necessary for regulation to be effective.

In our experience there are some critical features of regulatory systems which need to be present, or largely present, in order to ensure effectiveness and in turn to build and sustain public trust.

…Read the full article

26 January, 2012 Posted by | ATVOD VOD Censor, Ofcom Internet Censor | , , , | Leave a Comment

Who Pays the Ferryman?…Ofcom confirms on appeal that TV channels are responsible for paying the exorbitant ATVOD fees rather then VOD platform provider, Virgin

Read more ATVOD Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See press release from atvod.co.uk

nickelodeon logoATVOD welcomes Ofcom appeal decision that it was correct to determine that three Viacom companies were responsible for VOD services featuring their content on the Virgin Media platform

Appeals by Viacom companies Nickelodeon UK Limited, The Paramount Partnership and MTV Networks Europe against ATVOD determinations that they respectively hold regulatory responsibility for the Nickelodeon, Comedy Central and MTV video on demand content on the Virgin Media platform, have today not been upheld by Ofcom.

The decision means that the three Viacom companies rather than Virgin Media are responsible for ensuring that the services comprising their video on demand programmes on the Virgin Media platform comply with the statutory rules which apply to On Demand Programme Services.

The decision turned on the definition of editorial responsibility as defined in section 368A of the Communications Act 2003, which states that a person has editorial responsibility for a service if that person has general control over what programmes are included in the service and over the manner in which those programmes are organised within the service.

Welcoming the decision, ATVOD Chief Executive Pete Johnson said:

This is a complex area and the appeal system is a vital part of the process, giving service providers, in particular, greater clarity over where regulatory responsibility lies.

20 January, 2012 Posted by | ATVOD VOD Censor, Ofcom Internet Censor | , , , | Leave a Comment

Empire Building-Like ATVOD…ATVOD thwarted in their attempt to define newspaper video clips as TV-like and hence open to ATVOD censorship

Read more ATVOD Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from paidcontent.org

ATVOD logo 2011The Sun has won its appeal against the Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD) who claimed that newspaper’s video clips section was TV-like. Being TV-like forces websites to register with ATVOD’s very expensive Video on Demand censorship regime.

Ofcom deliberated on the appeal and ruled in favor of The Sun newspaper. The decision is wide-ranging and it will apply to video on other newspaper sites.

The Ofcom decision was based on the fact that the Sun publishes more content than just video on its website: Too much focus was placed on the ‘Sun Video’ section of The Sun’s website, it noted in that decision.

Essentially, Ofcom said that only sites whose primary purpose is to show the kind of video that one would find on regular television should be subject to ATVOD’s regulations.

This should come as some relief to magazine and newspaper publishers in the UK. This will save newspapers high fees, perhaps up to 20,000 depending on turnover and the number of service.

ATVOD has announced that it will withdraw claims for fees from other similar newspapers and magazines.

22 December, 2011 Posted by | ATVOD VOD Censor, Ofcom Internet Censor | , | Leave a Comment

For the Moment…Ofcom come out against file sharing website blocking

Read more Sharing at Ofcom at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from theregister.co.uk
See OfcomSite Blocking Report from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

ofcom site blockinhThe Department of Culture, Media and Sport has said that the government will not bring forward regulations on site-blocking established as reserve powers in the Digital Economy Act, following a technical Ofcom report. The ministry added: We are keen to explore the issues raised by Ofcom’s report and will be doing more work on what measures can be pursued to tackle online copyright infringement.

Ofcom’s report effectively kicked web-blocking into the long grass. Ofcom examined various techniques and concluded that blocking discrete URLs or web addresses is not practical or desirable as a primary approach. Ofcom instead recommends something critics might see as more draconian, however:

The report says that if site-blocking is adopted, it should be at the domain level. But such a technique will become harder, when digital signing is more common. So it recommends examining further measures such as transparent proxy-blocking (cleanfeed) or hybrid routing technology:

In the medium to longer term we consider that deep packet inspection techniques are likely to provide a more robust approach to blocking than DNS. Although costly to implement today, we would expect that costs will fall as the larger ISPs invest in DPI devices for other purposes. However, for it to be part of a legislative approach the cost burden for smaller ISPs would need careful evaluation as would legal concerns related to compatibility with privacy, data protection and interception rules.

4 August, 2011 Posted by | Internet Censorship, Ofcom Internet Censor | , | Leave a Comment

Ofcom PIN Pricks…Government wisely decided not to act on Ofcom call for PIN number age verification for internet video on demand

Read more Internet Video X News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Thanks to Nick
See article from guardian.co.uk

Ofcom logoIt has emerged that the government has not acted on a recommendation from the TV and internet  censor Ofcom, which said last year that the law should be changed so that sexually explicit content on video-on-demand websites could not be seen by children.

The government asked Ofcom last year to examine whether the law should be changed to protect children from pornographic material that was easily available on some adult sites, including Playboy.tv, which allowed paying members to download a wide range of pornographic material.

Many of them also offer some sexual material as try before you buy content that can be easily viewed without a credit card or account number.

Ofcom recommended in a report passed to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) nine months ago that the government should pass legislation forcing those sites to protect their free trial content with a pin number. But the coalition has not published Ofcom’s report or acted on its recommendations.

Predictably Labour has tried to claim a few morality votes from this technically infeasible Ofcom suggestion.

Ivan Lewis, the shadow culture secretary, said: David Cameron’s commitment to act on Bailey’s recommendations rings hollow now we know his government has suppressed this important report. It is either incompetence or a deliberate attempt to keep the public and parliament in the dark. Ofcom’s report should be published without delay so we can consider its findings and take the necessary action.

The DCMS said the report was still being considered by ministers. It said: The government is committed to protecting children from accessing harmful material and DCMS has requested advice from Ofcom and others regarding regulation of video-on-demand services. There is a range of views on whether new measures are required and we are currently considering options.

The proposals would only affect UK websites that are monitored by ATVOD, the internet video on demand censor.

12 June, 2011 Posted by | ATVOD VOD Censor, Ofcom Internet Censor, UK Government Censorship | , , , | Leave a Comment

Shrinking Ofcom…Hopefully they will sack their TV censors who are so easily offended by a little sex

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from media.ofcom.org.uk

Ofcom isn't workingOfcom has announced a significant reduction in its budget for 2011/12.

The cut follows an Ofcom programme launched in early 2010 to identify significant expenditure savings in response to the challenge facing the public sector more generally.

Over four years to 2014/15 Ofcom will reduce its total budget by 28% in real terms. In a drive to reshape and refocus the organisation, the majority of the cuts will be made in year one.

In 2011/12 Ofcom’s total budget will be £115.8m. This is a 22.5% real terms year-on-year reduction, some £26.7m. Savings will be made across a wide range of Ofcom’s expenditure.

1 April, 2011 Posted by | Ofcom Internet Censor, Ofcom TV Censor | | Leave a Comment

Thinking Blocks…Government asks Ofcom to study the practicality of ISP website blocking for file sharing websites

Read more UK Government Censorship News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from culture.gov.uk

DCMS logoOfcom will review sections of the Digital Economy Act to see if they are workable following public comments submitted in the Your Freedom exercise.

Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt has asked Ofcom to assess whether the Act’s reserve powers to enable courts to block websites dedicated to copyright infringement could work.

The site-blocking measures need secondary legislation before they can be introduced and the review will inform the Government’s decision on the next steps to take.

Hunt said: The Digital Economy Act seeks to protect our creative economy from online copyright infringement, which industry estimates costs them £400 million a year. I have no problem with the principle of blocking access to websites used exclusively for facilitating illegal downloading of content. But it is not clear whether the site blocking provisions in the Act could work in practice so I have asked Ofcom to address this question. Before we consider introducing site-blocking we need to know whether these measures are possible.

The review will look at areas such as whether it is possible for internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to the sites, how robust such a block could be and whether specific parts of a website can be blocked effectively.

2 February, 2011 Posted by | Dgital Economy Bill, Internet Censorship, Ofcom Internet Censor | , , , | Leave a Comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.