在數位匯流時代,線上影音平臺以新興服務之姿進入影音市場,與既有播送媒體呈現競爭、互補與競合的多元關係。富有匯流特性的線上影音平臺,在技術面向跨越監理架構的藩籬,在服務面向與既有播送媒體相仿,主管機關無法完全承襲過往的管制經驗。從而,如何在過於細分的媒體管制架構中,賦予新興媒體合適的監理定位,成為當前管制挑戰。 本研究透過美國實務見解,發現線上影音平臺與有線電視等既有播送媒體之監理定位相異外,亦能看出實務見解受限於既有規範等指引之不足,在區辨線上影音平臺與既有播送媒體差異上,多以技術作為評判依據,而較少從其他相關層面進行分析。本文進一步借鏡美國著作權局與聯邦通訊委員會的管制經驗,肯認線上影音平臺與有線電視間的監理定位並非完全吻合,並歸納出對我國之啟示:(一)影音服務產業的界線趨向模糊多變,既有產業技術取向的監理架構顯得過時且僵化;(二)過往的政策工具顯得不合時宜,主管機關應與時俱進地檢視並採取彈性管制作為;(三)未見市場失靈下,管制者不宜貿然介入,避免干擾產業發展。此外,著作權法與通訊傳播法制均為攸關線上影音平臺產業發展的一環,且兩者間具有相互影響的關係,從而宜評估監理政策變遷對授權市場之影響。 確立線上影音平臺之監理定位後,本研究認為其與有線電視在技術、政策與市場面向皆存在顯著差異,而不應將其納入有線電視管制框架。本研究另從著作權授權角度,提出政策評估可能之二大思考面向:(一)用於有線電視授權的政策工具,適用於線上影音平臺之效益與必要性;(二)調整線上影音平臺監理定位,對其授權實務造成之連動影響。希望藉此提出有關明確、具前瞻性之監理定位上的淺見,以期我國通傳產業政策能實質促進數位匯流與市場競爭。
In the age of digital convergence, online video distributors (“OVDs”) have entered video markets as new entrants and been involved in competitive, complementary and co-opetition relationship with incumbent providers. The characteristics of OVDs are boundary-breaking in terms of technology and service, rendering the authorities incompetent to adopt established regulatory experience. The challenge is therefore to find an adequate regulatory classification of OVDs under overly categorical media regulatory frameworks. This study recognizes the differences of regulatory classification between OVDs and incumbent cable systems (“CATV”) on the basis of particular cases in the US. We find that the judges are subject to ambiguous statutory languages, therefore rely solely on the technological factor to determine, rather than other relevant elements. This study further examines the regulatory experience of US Copyright Office and Federal Communications Committee and generalizes to three aspects: (1) the boundaries of video industry appear to be more ambiguous and expose the low degree of flexibility of existing regulatory framework; (2) the long-standing policies fail to be applicable to emerging market, hence the need for reform and alternative approaches; and (3) the authorities should leave the market unfettered and avoid impeding innovation while market failure is absent. Moreover, copyright law hinges on communication law system to some degree and is crucial to the development of OVDs, that is, it should also be taken into account that the assessment of impact on licensing market remain relevant. Aligned with US regulatory experiences, this study suggests that OVDs should not fall into the scope of CATV framework in the sense of technology, policy and market. This study additionally evaluates from the perspective of copyright licensing: (1) the benefit and necessity of enforcing CATV regulations on OVDs and (2) the impact arisen from change of OVDs’ regulatory classification, which will articulate an explicit and prospective regulatory classification and foster digital convergence and market competition.