必載(must-carry)規範,簡單來說,係指有線電視系統負有免費傳送無線電視台節目訊號之義務。無線電視使用公共頻譜資源,據此常被各國政府要求負擔部份公共服務義務,並具有免費的特性。為了保護具有公益性質且免費的無線電視,以免後來興起的有線電視壓縮無線電視生存空間,政府要求有線電視系統業者免費轉載無線廣播電視台,也就是必載規範的起源。另有認為,除了無線電波屬於公共財的原因之外,促進多元消息傳播、普及服務與媒體近用之理論,亦另共同建構必載規範之正當性。 必載規定有相當的理論基礎,在歐洲與美國也發展一段時間,引入我國也近十幾年,然其相關爭議卻未曾消停。尤其在電視數位化後,頻道數目大幅增加,業者提供新型態的視訊、互動、甚或數據服務,隨著技術革新,衍生的必載議題隨之增加。比如說,電視數位化後,類比無線頻道尚未收回前,有線電視業者是否得同時必載類比及數位頻道(雙重必載)?電視數位化後,頻道數量將大幅增加,究竟要必載一個頻道還是全部必載?必載規範是否構成對有線電視業者的言論自由限制與徵收而違憲?凡此種種,皆是技術革新對傳播法制帶來的新挑戰。 本文主要的研究目的為,檢視電視數位化對必載規範的衝擊,重新思考必載規範存在之價值。特別在我國正在推行電視數位化的現在,探討數位必載規範的正當性,並對有線廣播電視法草案提出建言。本文將整理、比較我國與其他國家必載規範特色;整理必載規範在美國憲法上的爭議。本文認為雙重必載與全部必載並無在我國實行的空間,並提倡應區分公共無線電視與商業無線電視給予不同的管制規範。
The must-carry law requires cable operators to transmit the programs and advertisements of over-the-air television stations. Broadcast television has the obligation to undertake public service duties and to be free of charge because it broadcasts via radio waves, which are public goods. In this sense the must-carry law is aimed to protect broadcast television in the TV market, where the robustness of cable TV has become a threat to broadcast television. Additionally, promoting widespread dissemination of information from multiplicity of sources and universal service are also the reasons why many governments establish must-carry regulation. Although must-carry law had been established for many years, it is still controversial. Many issues regarding how the law applies to the broadcasters’ digital signals arose. Dual carriage, total carriage and the relationship between freedom of speech, taking and must-carry regulation are main issues of digital must-carry law. The purpose of this research is to examine the impact of digital television on the must-carry law, and thus reconstruct the legal interests of digital must-carry regulations by analyzing must-carry law in Taiwan and other countries, as well as the leading cases in the U.S. This research examines the amendment of the must-carry regulation in Cable Radio and Television Act. We concluded that neither dual carriage nor total carriage is feasible in Taiwan, and that public broadcasting and commercial broadcasting should be controlled under different regulations.