Lenka Hrivnáková, Author at The Association of Commercial Television

FOREIGN APPROACH TO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT BY CHILDREN

The situation of copyright infringement by children abroad is very similar to the Czech Republic. A significant portion of the public here is not aware of the benefits that the protection of copyright and related rights brings to culture and the economy. Ironically, piracy is thus often regarded as acceptable behaviour on the grounds that if it is widespread, it cannot be illegal. And this parents’ misconception is unfortunately being adopted by their children.

Different countries have taken different approaches to the fight against illegal sharing of copyright works. But there is one thing they agree on. Education is essential for children and young people. This is the only way to raise a new generation that is well aware of the harm caused by pirate downloading and sharing, that is willing to comply with the law, and that will pass these attitudes on to their children. How do different countries approach the education of children and young people?

Greece

In 2014, the Hellenic Copyright Organisation (HCO) developed an educational programme for schools in cooperation with a working group of educators. In the same year, HCO organised a series of seminars to promote the programme, targeting both the regional officials in charge of the schools and the teachers who can select and implement the educational programme in their classrooms.

Greek Copyright School

In 2015, HCO received a grant from the EUIPO to launch the “Greek Copyright School” programme, comprising five core activities:

Printing of information materials and their distribution to teachers and pupils.
Organisation and delivery of training courses and seminars in many Greek cities.
Development and design of websites categorised for individual target segments (primary school pupils, secondary school students, teachers, and parents).
Development of electronic educational games.
Creation of a short, animated film on the importance of protecting copyright and related rights.

The Greek Copyright School was an inspiration for other countries

The implementation of the “Greek Copyright School” was a great success not only in terms of the quality of the materials produced but also in terms of the warm response that teachers and students expressed during and after their personal participation in the programme. The programme has also received accolades abroad. It has been presented as a model in its field four times at EUIPO meetings and forums and once at a one-day conference organised by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).

Copyrightschool.gr portal

The copyrightschool.gr website is divided into four sections according to the target segments for which the information is intended

primary school pupils
secondary school students
teachers
parents.

In the media library, all games, videos, infographics, guides, posters, FAQs, presentations, and other useful information are available in aggregate, regardless of the target segment. The news page provides an overview of the latest and planned events.

The sections for pupils, students, and teachers have an identical structure and their content always corresponds to the age of the users. The section for parents is in text form and aims to answer parents’ common questions on copyright and how to communicate this information to their children. Thanks to comic strips, quizzes, crosswords, games, and other interactive elements, the website is pleasant and lively and can effectively reach the target audience. A great example is an educational game based on the redesign of an octopus.

enjoylegal.gr portal

The enjoy legal portal was also initiated by the HCO. It aims to inform the Greek public about online platforms that legally offer copyrighted content. In other words, HCO collects and provides users with online platforms where they can legally watch or download movies, series, and sports events, listen to or download music, read online or download books, and access images and video games. The enjoy legal portal is a member of the agorateka network.

The agorateka portal was launched by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). It is a gateway to national portals providing quick and easy access to legal content offers – music, films and TV shows, e-books, video games, or sporting events. Currently, 24 countries participate in the agorateka project, comprising 107 platforms with links to more than 3,400 sites offering legal copyrighted content. In the Czech Republic, the project has been joined by portals such as FILMTORO, Pro-music Czech Republic and SROC Czech Republic.

Great Britain

Similar to the Czech Republic, stakeholders in England address the problem of cybercrime mainly through information portals.

Internet Matters

Internet Matters is a small non-profit organisation with a wide reach. It brings together a number of talented individuals who are committed to keeping children safe online and strive to help parents, caregivers, and educators stay up to date on the latest research and trends in digital safety.

The organisation has developed and operates a comprehensive portal offering guides and resources on safe internet. Advice is divided by age (0-5 years, 6-10 years, 11-13 years, 14+ years) as children’s online behaviour differs at different ages. And the risks to which different age groups are predominantly exposed also vary.

In addition to piracy, the organisation focuses on a range of other issues such as online hate, sexting, online grooming, fake news, screen time, inappropriate content, cyberbullying, online reputation, online pornography, self-harm, radicalisation, privacy, and identity theft.

In the section on piracy, there are statistics, risk descriptions, videos with parents’ opinions, children’s opinions to understand children’s perspectives and perceptions of the issue, links to articles related to the topic, “guides” focused on specific sub-issues (illegal downloads, viruses, etc.), safety tips and advice for parents on how to ensure safe access to content for their children and recommended additional sources of information.

The Industry Trust

Another organisation involved in addressing illegal downloading in the UK is The Industry Trust. This UK film, TV, and video consumer education organisation promotes the value of copyright and creativity. It aims to tackle the persistent problem of copyright infringement of films and TV programmes by inspiring viewers to appreciate great film moments and choose to watch films, TV programmes, and videos from legal sources.

It currently has more than 40 members, including distributors, cinemas, and online and offline retailers.

In collaboration with the film education charity Into Film, the organisation has developed educational material for teachers and pupils. This educational material is designed for pupils aged 7-14. It aims to highlight how to stay safe when accessing film and TV content online, while also introducing them to different types of malware and their effects, including webcam hacking, personal data leaks, and online blackmail. It calls on young people, parents, educators, social workers, law enforcement bodies, businesses, public officials, and the wider public to work together to create a better internet.

Germany

In Germany, the state media office Mediaanstalt NRW has developed an internet awareness PDF for parents. The rather comprehensive material covers various topics on child protection on the internet and is a practical and useful guide for parents of children of different ages.

Another work focusing on the topic of a safe internet is the publication Nicht alles, was geht, ist auch erlaubt. This booklet, which could be translated into English as Not everything that is possible is also allowed, provides internet users with the most important information on copyright and personality rights and the associated liability risks. In 2015, the brochure was expanded to include the topic of liability for illegal downloading by minors.

Verbrauchszentrale

Parents who are concerned about the penalties resulting from illegal downloading of content by their children are being targeted by the Verbrauchszentrale – the Federal Consumer Association. This organisation offers parents guidance in the form of best practice.

An essential piece of information for parents who are concerned about liability for their children’s illegal downloading on the internet is that they need to inform their children about the legal situation regarding copyright.

Parents in Germany who want to avoid liability must be able to prove in the event of a lawsuit that they have sufficiently informed their children about the prohibition on downloading and distributing copyrighted material. This means that they should note the date of such a conversation with the children as well as the content discussed. During a conversation about copyright infringement, parents should discuss all the dangers, prohibitions, and legal conditions in a child-friendly way and establish appropriate rules of conduct.

However, the website also states that, depending on the developmental maturity of the child, such a discussion makes sense from the age of 12 at the latest, while in theory both parents and children can be held responsible at a younger age.

Conclusion

All EU countries face the same problem of a lack of awareness of copyright and illegal downloading and sharing of content. Each country approaches the problem in its own way and focuses on different areas for solutions. The Greek model, with its Greek Copyright School, shows the importance of creating a structured and attractive educational programme including printed materials, seminars, and interactive online tools, and combining different forms and approaches to make education effective and fun for all ages. Britain can inspire with its emphasis on collaboration with non-profit organisations and the use of multimedia resources. The German model, with its emphasis on parental responsibility and prevention through informed conversations, may in turn encourage other countries to develop specific information campaigns for parents.

It is therefore extremely important for countries to inspire each other and share best practices. It is also important to exchange experiences and materials that can be adapted to the specific needs of each country. The use of effective elements from individual countries and the integration of best practices from abroad can also help establish an effective, sustainable educational programme in the Czech Republic, which will contribute to reducing the level of copyright infringement among children and young people.

SOURCES FOR WATCHING MOVIES AND TV SHOWS ONLINE LEGALLY AND FOR FREE

Gone are the days when people used to plan their time according to when their favourite movies or TV shows were on. Today’s hit is online viewing. There are many streaming services to choose from, with a huge range of films and TV series even in Czech, but they have one thing in common: they are paid. If we wanted to watch content without paying anything, do we even have any legal options?

Why legal? There are two main reasons. The first is ethical. It costs something to make a film, and if it’s a commercial project, it’s not fair to deprive the creators of income. The second is less altruistic – safety. Illegal platforms are at best on the edge of the law, often beyond the edge, and are at risk of malware attacks. So what options do we have if we limit ourselves to our Czech pond?

TV stations

Television stations that we can tune into on regular broadcasts offer access to live streaming over the internet. In addition, we can access at least some of the content in the archive of varying lengths for free. These are typically the creation of the station in question, so they are not restricted by licensing conditions.

TV Nova

TV Nova offers access to live broadcasts only for logged-in users. However, the account is free. However, while watching, you may occasionally encounter a message about a missing internet broadcast permission. In addition to the live stream, you can also watch recordings of Nova shows such as Survivor or On the Hunt. You’ll need a paid Voyo account for ad-free viewing and access to episodes that haven’t aired yet.

Voyo; Source: svetandroida.cz

Voyo costs 159 CZK per month, but offers a 7-day trial period. So if you happen to want to enjoy watching to the fullest and a week would be enough, there is this option.

Prima

Prima TV is not lagging behind the competition. The offer includes the possibility to watch both live broadcasts and shows from the archive. Both are subject to logging in. A free account will allow you to watch the live broadcast and the archive, both with commercials. Prima has an interesting subscription plan, where you can choose between a plan with half the amount of advertising or a more expensive one with no ads at all. In addition to this, they still vary in picture quality, from the free account in SD, through HD to FullHD.

prima+; Source: svetandroida.cz

iVysílání Czech Television

This is a big project of Czech Television. We can find a really large number of all possible genres to watch here. The shows are clearly divided into main categories, where we can find movies, series, documentaries, news… and each of them is further divided by genre (comedy, family, drama…). We can find here mainly shows produced by Czech Television, including real treasures in the form of films for memoirs, but not only those.

There are also foreign films, series and documentaries, but you should not delay watching them for too long, because they have a limited time for which they can be played. For some shows, we see a warning about the end of availability, or in the worst case, a message that the show cannot be played for licensing reasons.

Source: iVysílání

In addition to programmes from the archive, iVysílání allows you to watch live broadcasts of all Czech Television programmes.

Seznam TV

Seznam TV is a full-format television. It offers its own programmes, which it supplements with Czech and foreign content. There are films, series, cartoons, documentaries and news. Shows are broadcast by programme, but you can use the web environment to go back in time or if you watch Seznam TV on a regular device, you can use the HbbTV app (red button).

Zdroj: svetandroida.czStream.cz

Although, like Seznam TV, it is operated by Seznam, there are fundamental differences. While Seznam TV is more or less a mainstream broadcaster, Stream.cz specialises in original content created for an internet audience. Here you can find original Czech series, films, documentaries and other formats not normally available on broadcast TV.

Source: svetandroida.cz

YouTube

There is a wealth of content available on YouTube. Type in a relevant search phrase such as “free documentaries” and you’ll get a wide range of playlists. However, I have not been able to verify whether the videos are actually on YouTube legally (put there by the rights owners or at least agreed to by them) or whether they remain available according to the saying “where there is no prosecutor, there is no judge”. That is also why we do not provide any specific link. YouTube as such is available for free, but you cannot avoid advertisements. You can, however, purchase YouTube Premium, where, in addition to removing ads, you get YouTube Music and the app lets you play videos with the screen off. This is handy for music or podcasts.

Operators

All the big operators also offer TV packages and sometimes offer promotions. When it comes to long-term TV viewing, T-Mobile offers free Magenta TV in the basic version with its voice packages with unlimited data. You get 26 channels that you can watch on one device. You can activate Magenta TV in the My T-Mobile app as follows:

Magenta TV; Source: svetandroida.cz

After ordering, you will receive a username and password that you enter into the app. This is a really basic application, plus you get an error message when you try to access the archive.

O2 offers basic TV Blue with fixed internet, not a mobile tariff. Similar to T-Mobile, you get login credentials, you can share these between multiple devices, but only one will run at a time.

As you can see, the options are there, but you only ever get a limited range for free. The exception to this is Czech Television’s iBroadcast, but we actually pay for that with licence fees. Which service you choose, or whether you prefer one of the paid options, is up to you. But as always, we’d love it if you’d share your experiences in the comments.

Do you watch free movies or prefer paid services?

Source: svetandroida.cz

EU ELECTION COVERAGE KICKS OFF CHANGES AT TN LIVE

The news portal TN Live will become TV Nova’s main channel for broadcasting ahead of the European Parliament elections. At the same time, the portal itself will shift in content and come up with new programming.

The key pillar of the Nova Group’s pre-election coverage of the European Parliament elections will be the main debates on the TN Live web portal. They will take place on 17 May, 24 May, 31 May and 6 June. Each episode will be followed by articles on TN.cz and a report in Televizní noviny. They will be hosted by Martin Čermák and Háta Sassmannová, who is TV Nova’s permanent correspondent to the European Union. The debates will take place in the main building of TV Nova, will be broadcast live from 15:00 and will last 60 minutes.

“We will be inviting parties, movements or coalitions that average at least 3% of the vote in the electoral projections to the election coverage. We have informed the political parties and the public in advance about this key for the selection of guests. We are as transparent as possible,” says Kamil Houska, director of TV Nova’s newsroom.

Nova invites candidates to the debates based on surveys from Kantar, STEM, Stem/Mark, CVVM, Median, Ipsos and Data Collect published from 7 December 2023 to 30 April 2024.

At the same time, the TN Live portal will undergo a content transformation after three years of operation. Since May, the daily programme “Napřímo” has been included in the daily frequency, and the lifestyle magazine “Talk!” is also appearing more frequently. In June, the World Beyond Borders programme will be expanded and other new features on TN Live are expected to be added in the second half of the year.

We spoke to Kamil Houska, director of news at TV Nova, about the European Parliament elections and the plans for TN Live.

The TN Live website will be TV Nova’s main channel this year for broadcasting the debates leading up to the European Parliament elections, which fall on 7 and 8 June. The debates will not be part of TV Nova’s linear broadcast. Why?

It is because the European elections are different from the House of Commons elections or the presidential elections. From a TV point of view, what is interesting about the parliamentary elections is the clash of several party presidents. In the case of the euro elections, however, the attention is fragmented because there are no party presidents on the candidates’ lists, and then there are the candidates for European Commissioners. We have therefore decided to split the pre-election debates into a larger number of debates and to allow the parties to field a different candidate each time.

Nova has already published a key for inviting candidates to the debates. Is the one you will use for the European elections different from other election events?

We have had a mechanism in place for several years and we still follow it. We draw on several surveys from the major polling agencies each time and average all the published results of each party over a pre-determined period. On the basis of these, we calculate an average value that indicates whether or not they will cross the threshold for election. According to this key, we then invite representatives to the debates.

However, we also know that the situation on the political scene is changing and that several entities are hovering around the 2-3% threshold. Even sociologists admit that a few entities may approach the electability threshold. That is why we have decided that, in addition to the debates to which we are inviting representatives according to the clear key that I have described, we will also open up topics in Television Newspapers to which we will also record the views of the candidates of these smaller parties.

Given that you will be bringing the debates to the webcast, have you considered inviting representatives of all the parties to the debates? This is precisely to avoid possible criticism that participation in the debates is open only to certain entities…

It will never be possible to satisfy everyone, and we must set a limit, because we cannot invite everyone. Someone will always feel aggrieved that they did not get to participate in the debate. We publish our rules clearly and in the long term and do not change them. We go by a clear key and, unfortunately, there is no other parameter than the averages of opinion polls. Yes, we can also stick to the results of the last election, but that is, in my opinion, an even worse option, because in one election period the mood of society can vary quite a lot.

We are going by a clear key and, unfortunately, there is no other parameter than polling averages.

So the backbone of the Euro election coverage will be four debates spread over four weeks of an hour’s duration without a super-debate…

Yes. In addition, we will also include the highlights of each debate in the TV news. The superdebate makes sense in parliamentary or presidential elections because in these cases the roles of the debaters are clearly understood. In the case of the European elections, it differs in that someone is a candidate, someone is the leader of a candidate list, and someone is running for Commissioner. The European elections are the most difficult for us to explain to people that they are about them. Half of the people do not know or do not realise what the EU brings to them. The ambition of full-screen commercial television is to explain to people in a concise and clear way the basic things that are decided in Brussels.

To broadcast the election results, you are preparing the Our Europe programme, which will start on Monday 10 June instead of Breakfast five minutes before 6:00 and will last about three hours. This is a different style of presenting the results than in the parliamentary or presidential elections.

The Euro elections are atypical in that they wait until the last polling stations have closed. This is an advantage and a disadvantage at the same time – the disadvantage is that you cannot continuously count the results and report on how everyone is doing. The advantage, on the other hand, is that by the time we can report, the results for the Czech Republic will have been counted and we can tell the audience the result straight away. For this reason, there is no point in preparing an extraordinary continuous broadcast on Saturday, because we could just say that the elections are over. The results will be known on the night of Sunday to Monday, so we will offer a special three-hour broadcast on Monday morning to analyse them.

You are not planning a special magazine dedicated to the European elections in the linear TV Nova broadcast?

We have considered it, but we think it would be better to use our existing programmes and spread the topics evenly. They will appear in the programmes Televizní noviny, Střepiny or Za pět minut 12áct.

How important are the European elections for Nova in terms of news priorities? Is their importance growing?

It depends on your point of view. It is no secret that voters are not that interested in the Euro elections. But it is an important election for journalists and broadcasters because we want people to understand that by participating in the elections they can influence the running of the European Union. We often hear that people complain about the European Union, but if they can express their opinion in the elections, they will stay at home. That is why we want to focus on elections. We want to explain to the audience that many things are no longer decided at national level, but are decided at European level.

The European elections are the most difficult for us to explain to people that they concern them.

The debates on the occasion of the European Parliament elections are now one of the most visible projects of TN Live. But alongside that, you’re also expanding the coverage of some of your existing weekday shows – specifically, Straight Talk and Talk. What do you hope to get out of this?

We intend to modify the functioning of the TN Live portal. We see that traffic to the site is high when there are major events that can attract tens to hundreds of thousands of people. However, when nothing extraordinary happens, traffic logically drops. It turns out that programmes that are clearly defined work well, so that the audience knows what to associate with such a programme. Because in this case they often search for it retrospectively and do not necessarily watch it live. That’s the case with the show Straight – it has eight to 10 thousand viewers live and tens of thousands more watching it in the next 48 hours in additional viewing. The implication is that TN Live can work in a “podcast” way, so to speak, in the time not devoted to live coverage of important events. Therefore, we decided to create a plethora of shows exclusively for TN Live on a daily basis. Each show will have a regular place in the schedule. The show Straight will focus on 20-30 minute interviews with politicians every weekday. The Talk show is showbiz oriented. But we are also preparing other programmes. We also want to expand the distribution of content to other platforms and not just keep it on the TN Live website. (TN Live is also available on the HbbTV app and Voyo, ed.)

What other shows are you preparing for TN Live?

In addition to the aforementioned Straight and Talk shows, we are planning daily sports shows where we will focus on a different sport every day. The Nova Group holds a number of broadcasting rights to sports programmes, and we want to take advantage of this. We are also planning programmes on a weekly basis, for example a programme focusing on literature or also programmes targeting certain groups. For example, topics related to the police, the army or the fire brigade are quite varied and are of interest to a large group.

We want to expand the distribution of content to other platforms and not just keep it on the TN Live website. So we will involve YouTube and podcast platforms in the distribution.

A new feature of TV Nova’s journalistic programmes this year was the programme Na vaší strane, but after a month of broadcasting it has moved from Saturday evenings to Mondays at 22:30. What do you think of the change in airtime?

It turned out that the Thursday slot is more convenient than the weekend one. The show highlights injustices and for this reason the weekend time has not worked well for us, as viewers seem to have a harder time accepting shows that are less relaxing on the weekend. The move has helped and we are pleased with the results of the show. We are also getting a large number of tips each week from viewers on topics we can open up on the show. And we’re proud that we’ve already been able to help several people actually solve their difficult problems. That the show isn’t just about highlighting the problem, about warning other people, but that it can actually help those particular people.

We’ve had a similar experience of shifting to a different time slot with Weekend. We used to air Weekend on Tuesdays, and because it didn’t work as much at that time, we moved it to Weekend Breakfast, and last May we brought it back as a stand-alone show on Monday nights at 10:30. In this new time, it’s doing great numbers, with a share in excess of 23% and working better than before. But it’s also true that we’ve changed its programming, producer and it has new editors.

Source: mediaguru.cz

AKTV HAS ENTERED INTO COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH FASTSHARE.CLOUD

At the end of last year, the Association of Commercial Television (AKTV), together with TV Nova and FTV Prima, concluded an agreement with the operators of the Fastshare.cloud service, Inside Invest, and its former operator, Fusion Media. The agreement sets out the terms of an out-of-court settlement. The operators of Fastshare.cloud will ensure that no copyrighted works of AKTV members appear on their service, and once these conditions are met, the commercial TV broadcasters will end the court and enforcement proceedings. The agreement also includes payment of the costs of legal representation of TV Nova and FTV Prima in related litigation.

Commercial TV broadcasters who are members of the Association of Commercial Television have succeeded in reaching another agreement aimed at greater protection of their content in the online environment. The commercial broadcasters’ legal action against the operators of the Fastshare.cloud repository resulted in an out-of-court settlement agreement in November 2023.

The subject of the agreement is Fastshare.cloud’s commitment to take technical measures to ensure that the works of the Nova and Prima TV groups are not available on and cannot be uploaded to the service as required by the Copyright Act with effect from 5 January 2023. The list of protected works is continuously updated to take account of new titles or new series episodes. In addition, the former operator of Fastshare.cloud reimbursed the commercial broadcasters for the legal and court costs they incurred in protecting the copyright in Fastshare.cloud. In accordance with the agreement, the broadcasters subsequently terminated the legal and enforcement proceedings against the former and current operators of Fastshare.cloud.

“After a six-month trial period, we can now see that our requirements as a copyright holder are not excessive and can be met without any problems, just as the operators of Fastshare.cloud do. At the moment, there is a minimum of our content on the service and if we find our works that the filtering has not yet detected, we communicate promptly and gradually improve the filtering together,”

says Klára Brachtlová, President of the Association of Commercial Television.

“Internet piracy remains a clear priority for us. We are therefore still ready to negotiate with other internet storage operators and jointly set up conditions and technical measures to prevent illegal sharing of our content,”

adds Brachtlová.

In addition to active legal protection of copyright, the Association of Commercial Television has long focused on educational activities. As part of these activities, it operates an information website on copyright, which is available at aktv.cz/copyright. Interested parties will find here a glossary explaining terms on the topic of intellectual property protection, answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs), and regular news on internet piracy. There is also an up-to-date series of articles on the new study Online Copyright Infringement in the European Union, published by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

COMMERCIAL TV STATIONS PROPOSE MORE RESTRICTIONS ON SPONSORSHIP AND ADVERTISING ON ČT

Sponsorship of only longer programmes, limited number and length of sponsorship messages, limitations on product placement and advertising on ČT sport, and zero advertising online are some of the ideas of commercial broadcasters about changes in the placement of commercial messages on Česká televize (Czech Television, ČT).

Pavel Kubina, a long-time media lawyer, is a member of the Board of Directors of the Association of Commercial Television (AKTV), which brings together the most important domestic commercial television stations. He has moved from the position of Director of the Legal Department of FTV Prima to the position of Director for Media Law Issues as of February 2024. He focuses on legislation related to television broadcasting, media content and the advertising market and also deals with the issues of copyright, personality protection, anti-piracy, and artificial intelligence.

Much has been happening in the field of media legislation in recent months. We therefore talked to Pavel Kubina about the upcoming amendments to the Czech Television Act and the Radio and Television Fees Act, the upcoming new amendments to the Audiovisual Act and the new European media regulation EMFA. We also touched on how the big commercial TV groups are progressing in the fight against pirated content.

Probably the biggest current legislative topic is the preparation of the so-called major media amendment, which includes changes to the Czech Television Act, the Czech Radio Act and the Radio and TV Fees Act. After the Ministry of Culture submitted a proposal last year to increase the TV fee by CZK 25 to CZK 160 and the radio fee by CZK 10 to CZK 55 and to extend the basis for collecting the TV fee to mobile phone and computer owners, the entire commercial media market responded with rejection. Based on this reaction, working groups were established in which both public service and private media were represented. However, whether they agreed on anything and what the revised draft of the major media amendment might look like is not known at the moment.

Since the beginning of January, working groups have been meeting at the Ministry of Culture to discuss possible proposals for amendments to the Czech Television Act, the Czech Radio Act and the Radio and TV Fees Act. However, it is unclear at this point how the preparations are progressing. Has there been any consensus within the groups?

At the moment, we have been informed that a solution will be created based on minimalist amendments to the Czech Television Act and the Czech Radio Act and a memorandum where the tasks of the public service are to be described in more detail. We had the impression that the draft wording of the amendments to the two Acts would result from the discussions within the working groups but a separate dialogue between the Ministry of Culture and Czech Television and coalition negotiations were going on in parallel. We will see what the outcome will be.

Earlier statements by representatives of the commercial market and information leaked out regarding the preparation of the new draft version of the laws showed that the commercial market had brought its proposal for changes to the amendments to the laws. Can you mention any specific proposals that you think the amendments should contain?

Yes, we have provided the Ministry of Culture with our proposals. Our premise is that we want to preserve the dual system, i.e. the coexistence of the public service broadcaster and private broadcasters, to ensure media pluralism. However, in order to set up the dual system correctly, we consider it crucial to define the public service as precisely as possible. In our view, it is important that someone on behalf of the state articulates what is considered to be the public service. European law requires the definition of a public service to be as precise as possible to determine what a public service is and what is not. It is entirely up to the Member State to determine what it wants and does not want as a public service. The definition of public service should certainly not be as all-encompassing and flexible as it is now, the state should not be passive and public service broadcasters should not de facto define their role themselves.

Is defining the role of the public service primarily a task for the Ministry of Culture in your opinion? Or who should define it for the state?

We believe that this is primarily the responsibility of the Ministry of Culture. Someone has to formulate the state demand. That is the core. Unfortunately, in our country, it started the other way round: it was said what the fees should be but it was not specified what the public service was. The debate on the definition of a public service has never been completed. That is why we are not saying that the proposed amount of increase or extension of the fee is correct because we still do not know what a public service is. The requirement for a precise definition of the rules on public service aid is also justified by the protection of competition and the position of the commercial media in that competition. The current Czech Television Act describes public service only vaguely. It uses examples to list the main tasks, which means that there are some other tasks but it is not clear which ones. There are terms such as multimedia services, additional services… It is hard to imagine what all these terms actually mean.

How should this be treated in legislation? By extending the existing definition in the Czech Television Act or by adopting a special document or charter Minister of Culture Baxa talked about?

The definition of public service should certainly be legally binding. We think that the most basic definition should be in the law. It would be good to provide further clarification in a document that we refer to as the Binding Public Service Rules. We have the idea that these rules would be updated every five years and that they would be approved in a way similar to the Czech Television Code, i.e. in the Parliament. There should also be a procedure in the law for approving new or substantially changing the existing services. This follows from European law. We propose that the services should be approved by an institution other than Czech Television – for example, the Council for Radio and Television Broadcasting (RRTV) or the Czech Television Council. The institution would assess the adequacy of costs, the impact of such a service on the media market and a number of other things.

The definition of public service should certainly not be as all-encompassing and flexible as it is now, the state should not be passive and public service broadcasters should not de facto define their role themselves.

So what do you think is the key to maintaining the dual system? The specification of the public service?

We see as a priority the refinement of the definition and tasks of the public service, the introduction of binding rules for the performance of the public service and the introduction of a process for the approval of new services. Until this is in place, fees should not be addressed. We know that the Ministry of Culture is working more with the idea of a memorandum that the public service broadcaster would draft, then negotiate with the Council of the Czech Television or the Council of the Czech Radio and then the Minister of Culture would sign it. We feel that the approach to the process of developing the memorandum is rather unfortunate because there is no space for the state to actively articulate its demand. If the conclusion is that there is a memorandum that is adopted in this way, we would certainly want the fee increase to be conditional on the memorandum having already been concluded, and on the commercial media having an institutionalised opportunity to participate in negotiations on its content.

Advertising limits for commercial and public service broadcasters are an essential part of the dual system setup. Commercial broadcasters are allowed higher limits for the placement of advertising and other commercial messages. Czech Television is also allowed to include a certain volume of commercial messages, albeit much lower. Do you call for higher limits on commercial messages or do you have an idea of a completely ad-free Czech Television?

We see sponsorship as the main problem because it has developed into a form on ČT that, in our opinion, the legislator did not intend. Sponsorship on ČT is largely interchangeable with advertising for sponsors and viewers, and although it complies with the current legislation, its form obliterates the original idea of limiting the scope of ČT’s commercial activities. The legislator intended to introduce lower limits on commercial communications for public service media than for private TV. We therefore propose that ČT should only be allowed to sponsor longer programmes, of 30 minutes or more, with a maximum of two sponsors and a sponsorship message of no more than 5 seconds. As far as advertising is concerned, i.e. classic spots, we believe that the ČT sport programme should operate in the same regime as other ČT programmes; advertising could thus be included only if its placement is a condition for obtaining broadcasting rights to a given sports competition. We believe that product placement should also be reduced. It could remain for sports programmes, but for others we see no reason to do so. There should be no online advertising – neither on the internet nor in on-demand services. However, we acknowledge that it would be necessary to retain online sponsorship of production that took place within a TV show.

Sponsorship on ČT is largely interchangeable with advertising for sponsors and viewers, and although it complies with the current legislation, its form obliterates the original idea of limiting the scope of ČT’s commercial activities.

Given the time lag, there is growing uncertainty as to whether the amendments will make it through the Chamber of Deputies in time to enter into force in 2025. What are your ideas about the timing of the next steps?

As commercial broadcasters, we need legal certainty, which we don’t have now. We want to get the amendments sorted out as quickly as possible, but until there is a more precise specification of what constitutes public service broadcasting, the preparations cannot move forward. Otherwise, we agree that it would be good to get the amendment through as quickly as possible. This means that the revised texts of the amendments should be submitted to the government by the summer so that they can begin to be debated in the Chamber of Deputies.

Discussions were also held on the form of the amendment to the Audiovisual Act. According to the July 2023 agreement, the fees for the Czech Film Fund or Audiovisual Fund are to be increased to 2% for all audiovisual market participants, including video-on-demand services. How has the drafting of the amendment progressed?

The level of the fee was just one of the topics, a number of other topics were debated, and not everything was reflected in the proposal that has already gone to the government. We hope that our comments will be included in the text, at least in the form of amendments.

What are the specific requirements?

The draft amendment retains the supplement to the TV advertising revenue fee, which amounts to 2% of the annual advertising revenue. It ensures that the Fund collects at least CZK 150 million from TV stations. However, in our opinion, in times of media convergence and changes in viewing behaviour, this surcharge of up to CZK 150 million is no longer justified.

Furthermore, we do not consider it good that on-demand services that are funded only by advertising are also subject to the on-demand service charge. This is because they compete with on-demand content-sharing platforms, which are not subject to the fee. This puts Czech operators at a disadvantage. We also believe that specialised on-demand services, such as sports, music or news and journalism, should not be subject to the fee.

In our opinion, the proposal should have been refined so that one service could not be charged twice.

We also find it problematic that the proposal significantly favours independent producers when it comes to TV production. It is good that the range of supported formats has been extended to include small-screen formats. However, the proposal is designed in such a way that only independent producers can apply for the incentive and they still have to prove a share of the rights corresponding to the support drawn. Sometimes, however, these companies are in the position of being just producers, and the creative part is up to the television. Or the TV station finances the creative part. So the law effectively extorts the wealth of one type of market entity at the expense of another. In our view, contractual freedom should work in this respect.

In our opinion, the proposal should have been refined so that one service could not be charged twice.

The European Parliament has recently approved the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which will be incorporated into national legislation in the coming months. What is your assessment of the text of the EMFA?

As representatives of the commercial market, we are in favour of the lowest possible regulation. We do not see the EMFA as indispensable. On the other hand, there are some positive elements. These include the guarantee of non-interference by politicians in editorial activities. The EMFA also introduces a new European Board for Media Services to oversee the implementation of the legislation. The question is who will represent the Czech Republic in this body and which authority will have which competences. We will have to wait for a decision.

The EMFA also relates to the ability of media operators to resist the deletion of content by major internet platforms. How much weight do you attach to this regulation and what can it realistically cause?

It is good that such a procedure exists. The important thing will be who is to be the media service operator that can use such a procedure. We do not want state, and certainly not private, lists of good and bad media to decide which media deserve protection.

AKTV has long been supporting the protection of copyright on the internet. Several recent court decisions, as well as the adoption of the European Digital Services Act, give hope for more effective action against pirated content. Do you see the situation changing?

Previous legislation already had the potential to solve the problem, but legislation alone is never enough and there must be a workable decision-making mechanism. Moreover, in the case of pirated content, it is important that decisions are taken quickly. The fact that the DSA was adopted had no immediate impact on our cases.

We were successful at court several times in the past, and as a consequence, we have entered into a number of agreements with platform operators to put in place anti-piracy measures that have so far proved effective. But unfortunately, there are still some platforms that keep applying piracy practices and are fighting back by dragging out the court proceedings. Unfortunately, the courts do not always understand the true nature of the pirate platforms’ business, which is competitive with the media or legal services. Sometimes this leads to results such that we have success in litigation but it comes so late that it does not matter anymore.

In our view, in the first round, the pirated content should be made unavailable on the relevant platform at the request of the rights holder, and if this is not done, the entire service should be made unavailable in an administrative procedure.

What measures would help speed up the effective prevention of the dissemination of pirated content?

We have found the unfair competition route to be more viable and much more understandable to the courts than copyright law. What is effective is the issuance of a preliminary injunction. Possible non-compliance leads to fines, the amount of which may be significant for these platforms, at which point they become interested in settling the situation.

But it is time for a radical cut because the level of internet piracy in the Czech Republic is still high compared to developed European countries. It is not only investors, authors or artists who are losing money due to piracy but also the Czech Film Fund and the National Film Archive.

We believe that these matters should be decided in an administrative procedure with fixed time limits for decision-making. In our view, in the first round, the pirated content should be made unavailable on the relevant platform at the request of the rights holder, and if this is not done, the entire service should be made unavailable in an administrative procedure. It is very important that the protection is also applicable for the future, e.g. for future episodes of an ongoing series.

Such an administrative process exists in Greece, and we consider it to be quite transferable to the Czech legal environment. A similar administrative process also exists in Italy. We are convinced that such a solution is cheap and can bring a lot of money to the state and the institutions mentioned.

It would be appropriate to include such a provision in the amendment to the Audiovisual Act or to the forthcoming Digital Economy Act.

Pavel Kubina is the Director of Media Law Issues at FTV Prima and since February 2024, a member of the Board of Directors of the Association of Commercial Television (AKTV). He has been working in media law since 2001 when he joined the management of the Legal Department of FTV Prima. Since February 2024, he has been appointed Director of Media Law Issues.

Source: mediaguru.cz

THE STRONGEST GROUP IN APRIL WAS NOVA, IT ALSO HAD THE HIGHEST GROWTH

The Nova TV group posted the highest year-on-year growth in the TV market in April and also achieved the highest share.

The group with the highest share of the TV market this April was Nova. It achieved the highest shares not only in the universal 15+ audience group in daytime broadcasting, but also in the other crucial 15-54 and 18-69 audience categories in daytime and prime time broadcasting. This is according to official ATO-Nielsen audience measurement data.

The Nova Group also notched up the highest year-on-year increases in both all-day and prime-time in April. Česká televize finished second in the 15+ (all day) group, just ahead of third-placed Prima. However, CT’s share decreased the most year-on-year of the six TV groups. In prime time, the share of Prima and Česká televize was the same in the 15+ group, while in the 15-54 and 18-69 audience categories Prima had a very slightly higher share in prime time than CT.

Among the other TV groups, Atmedia’s representation continued to grow to 6.88% (18-69), thanks in part to the addition of Warner TV to its portfolio, which recorded a share of 0.5% in April. In contrast, the Barrandov group continued to decline.

Share of TV groups (%), full day, April 2024

Source: ATO-Nielsen, Live TV+TS0-3 as of 6 May 2024, prime-time = 19:00-23:00

Share of TV groups (%), prime-time, April 2024

Source: ATO-Nielsen, Live TV+TS0-3 as of 6 May 2024, prime-time = 19:00-23:00

Of the individual stations, Prima Krimi (+0.76 pp., valid for 15+, all day) and Prima Love (+0.61 pp.) posted the highest year-on-year increases in April, followed by Nova Gold (+0.53 pp.) and Nova Action (+0.37 pp.).

The most-watched TV programmes in April were Shadows in the Fog (CT1, 1.34m 15+ viewers), Specialists (Nova, 1.29m) and Televizni noviny (Nova, most-watched edition, 1.2m).

Source: mediaguru.cz

Statement of the Association of Commercial Television on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transparency and targeting of political advertising

APRIL 2024

On Tuesday 27 February 2024, the European Parliament approved by a large majority in plenary the new rules on transparency in political advertising, following a political agreement on the regulation reached by the European Parliament, the Council of the EU, and the European Commission on 6 November 2023. The adopted legislation was also formally approved by the Council on 11 March 2024, the European Parliament signed the Regulation on 13 March 2024 and the Regulation was subsequently published in the Official Journal of the EU, entering into force 20 days after its publication.

The proposal was put forward by the European Commission as part of the European Democracy Action Plan to complement the Digital Services Act on the specific issue of transparency of online political advertising. The Regulation aims to address various concerns raised by the prevalence of online political advertising, such as the lack of transparency of individual advertisements and campaigns, the misuse of personal data, and the potential exploitation of these loopholes by political actors.

While we generally welcome the consensus reached on the adopted document, which has the potential to bring more transparency and ensure the protection of personal data in the environment of online political advertising, we must also express our concern that the text of the Regulation still contains a number of shortcomings that were repeatedly pointed out during the legislative process and that we as private broadcasters also commented on in our July 2022 statement. Although we believe that the Regulation was intended as a stepping stone to ensure transparency of online campaigns, the text of the Regulation has not fully met these ambitions (refer to the vague definitions that persist in the final text).

We appreciate that the final text of the definition of political advertising includes criteria based on remuneration, however, we must express some disappointment that the definition has not been clarified and the Regulation does not specify political advertising exclusively as online political advertising to avoid, inter alia, undermining or affecting the existing functioning regulatory frameworks and national definitions of political advertising since the internal market problems with regard to political advertising only concern the online environment as we have already stated in our previous comment.

On the other hand, provisions that we very much welcome and that were included in the final text of the Regulation after the negotiations on the wording are the clauses relating to political opinions expressed in programmes and the amendments adopted to ensure that audiovisual media services are not excessively affected, i.e. that the text of the adopted Regulation is not inconsistent with the AVMSD.

As regards the provisions on transparency, we consider it very beneficial that repositories have been included in the text of the Regulation; this step is essential to ensure transparency not only for individual advertisements but also for advertising campaigns. As we have stated before, we welcome the intention to address non-transparent political advertising and its impact on the democratic process and democratic society, we believe that internal market issues are fundamentally linked to the online sphere while traditional political advertising in traditional media – if it is allowed at all – is already limited to the national level and strictly regulated.

In our July 2022 statement, we emphasised as absolutely essential that online platforms should be directly responsible for any political or other advertising content shown to consumers through them and should make the assessment themselves rather than relying on third-party statements given that we as linear broadcasters have long been subject to such a requirement. Different rules contribute to inequality in the market, which we consider highly inappropriate. We believe that the adopted Regulation will resolve the most pressing inequalities that we pointed out in our previous statement.

On the other hand, we have to say that we welcome the clarifications contained in Article 15 where more effective mechanisms are introduced to ensure that all affected players “examine” and “make best efforts to examine” the sponsors’ declarations. As we have mentioned before, we as commercial TV broadcasters play a major role in informing the public by providing diverse, credible, and verified news and political coverage, all while being regulated to the maximum extent possible. There is no reason for digital platforms to shirk responsibility for the advertising content they select, place, promote, and ultimately profit from.

In conclusion, the final text of the Regulation has been significantly improved, supplemented, and linked to existing legislation (e.g. AVMSD, DSA, and GDPR) following the legislative process. Nevertheless, it still contains a number of provisions that are questionable and could be resolved during implementation. We consider it essential to ensure that the new rules are not counterproductive, hindering political expression rather than encouraging it transparently and effectively. Thus, while our statement points out many of the pitfalls of the Regulation, in general principle we welcome the effort to establish rules for online providers of political advertising services, even though in our view, this could have been achieved more appropriately, i.e. by adopting a regulation that would have maintained the existing frameworks for regulated (traditional) players and that would have applied fully equivalent rules for the “new” players who are not yet regulated.–

THE MAN LET PEOPLE DOWNLOAD MOVIES. HE FACES UP TO EIGHT YEARS IN PRISON

A 35-year-old man from region of Pardubice suspected by police of downloading 1 408 films and making them available for free distribution faces up to eight years in prison. He is said to have caused nearly CZK 60 million in damages to copyright owners.

According to the police, the man downloaded films from a data file repository, which he then made available for further download to people so they could obtain copies of them. “They could not only watch them repeatedly, but also dispose of them in other ways, such as making them available to other people,” police spokeswoman Dita Holečková said.

Police officers began investigating the case in 2021, when they identified the man and searched his home. They seized computer equipment, data carriers and recording equipment.

“Subsequently, we had expert reports drawn up in the field of cybernetics and the field of patents and inventions, economics,” Holečková said.

The man is charged with criminal offences of copyright infringement, copyright-related rights and database rights.

Source: novinky.cz

European Media Freedom Act (EMFA)

Statement of the Association of Commercial Television on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU

APRIL 2024

On 26 March 2024, the European Council adopted the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which aims to ensure media freedom and pluralism, as well as editorial independence. The EMFA is intended to create a common framework for media services in the EU internal market, to introduce measures to protect journalists and media providers from political interference, and to facilitate cross-border media activities within the EU.

As broadcasters associated in the Association of Commercial Television (AKTV), we have followed the whole legislative process very closely and have been actively involved in the discussions on the amendments, both on our own behalf and through the multinational professional associations with which we work, because we understand that the regulation could affect not only broadcasters but also the entire media market in the European Union in a fundamental way.

Last year, we already commented on the then draft regulation to the effect that we understood the objectives pursued by the European Commission in putting forward the EMFA proposal, although we considered loosening of the existing regulation rather than further regulation of the market to be a more appropriate solution. In the aforementioned statement of April last year, we drew attention to the potential positive benefits that we saw in the EMFA text from the outset, despite the above facts. However, we also pointed to provisions that needed to be refined in our opinion to comply with existing legislation and to take into account the practical expectations of the market.

In particular, we saw the shortcomings of the wording of the draft regulation in the setting of unequal obligations of online platforms in comparison with the obligations of traditional media, since online platforms are in certain aspects direct market competitors to traditional media competing for the same range of entities or financial allocations. In this respect, EMFA has undergone significant changes to ensure that transparency rules generally apply to all media market players. Therefore, we have to mention in this context that we appreciate the explicit inclusion of online platforms in the relevant articles, namely merger control, audience measurement and state advertising. Although we are of the opinion that the definition of audience measurement still contains some problematic points to be clarified, on a global scale we find the compromise reached to be acceptable in this respect.

We consider it very important that the regulation does not interfere in any way with the freedom of expression and does not provide any means for Member States to regulate the editorial content of the media; on the contrary, it expressly prohibits such interference (Article 4(2)). Any attempts to regulate editorial content would pose a major risk to democracy and open the way to abuse. The regulation recognises the importance of self-regulation, which is, among other things, in line with the overall support for self-regulatory initiatives in the European Democracy Action Plan. We will therefore support meaningful self-regulation where it makes sense from the perspective of preserving freedom of expression and a fair media environment and does not lead to editorial independence being affected.

In this context, it is worth recalling the much-discussed power of the European Commission to issue implementing guidelines in certain areas, but in this respect, it is probably premature to assess the impact of the relevant provisions in any depth. Practice will show whether this instrument will serve to preserve the democratic principles of European society. Member States should therefore go further and introduce more robust safeguards to protect media freedom and pluralism and the rights of journalists as a precautionary measure.

The last provisions of the regulation that we want to mention are those that contain safeguards to protect journalists and their sources, an approach to protecting editorial integrity. Editorial independence is a fundamental condition of democracy and guarantees the possibility of unrestricted and critical public debate. In this respect, the regulation recognises both the need for assured freedom of editorial decisions and the need to follow established editorial lines. In general, we would consider any additional interference in the relationship between the publisher and the editorial team through possible further regulation to be counterproductive and detrimental to media freedom and pluralism.

As for the protection of journalists and the sources they use for their work, these sections have been the subject of great debate in many forums and at many levels, right up to the very end of the legislative process. We are concerned that the power to use spyware in the public interest is very broadly defined in the regulation, raising concerns that it may give Member States a great deal of leeway in certain situations without clearly defined boundaries.

There is probably no need to argue that independent media services play a unique role in the internal market. As we have pointed out many times, broadcasters were sufficiently regulated even before EMFA, including voluntary regulation through self-regulatory mechanisms; however, we have to accept the fact that Member States have agreed to further EU regulation. It is usual for any new regulation to be tested by the application practice; in this case, it will be the market of the entire European Union with different media service providers. The evaluation mechanisms are already envisaged now, they are supposed to start in autumn 2029, and although they are primarily focused on the evaluation of the functioning of the European Board for Media Services, which replaces the current regulators group ERGA, we assume that this will not be the only issue addressed and the EMFA will be evaluated as a whole in terms of functionality and adequacy.

In conclusion, we consider it appropriate to emphasise that we believe that the European Media Freedom Act will meet the expectations in the most fundamental respect, i.e. it will successfully target the efforts of politicians to interfere in editorial activities or influence the independence of the media. This is the main objective that we expect the new regulation to achieve, and this is where we see its main future role.

MAY 2023

As the Association of Commercial Television (AKTV), we understand that the European Commission’s objective in presenting this proposal is to ensure that media service providers are able to provide their services freely and independently in an open and transparent market, a market that allows for a plurality of media actors and opinions, and we are aware that independent media services play a unique role in the internal market. Although we believe that there is no need for further regulation for broadcasters, and we have already pointed out that we would prefer deregulation, if there is a consensus in the European area that regulation should be adopted, what we need to address in particular are the practical implications for broadcasters.

There are a number of provisions in the proposal which, although not necessary, can contribute to ensuring that independent media services continue to play a unique role in the internal market and keep on performing their rightful role in a democratic society. Broadcasters provide citizens and businesses with access to a plurality of views and reliable sources of information, and this principle must be maintained going forward. It seems logical to us that not only traditional media – i.e. offline media – but also online media are covered by the proposal.

In this context, we believe that it is legitimate for the Commission to support the self-regulatory initiatives of the media sector, as explicitly highlighted, among other things, in the European Democracy Action Plan. We see great potential for this path in the future and prefer it to legal regulation.

We see potential benefits of the proposed regulation in the provisions on state advertising and believe that a broad definition of state advertising under Article 2 (15) is legitimate.

The proposed provisions governing requests for enforcement of obligations by video-sharing platforms under Article 14 regarding the enforceability of obligations imposed on video-sharing platforms are positive in our opinion.

In principle, we appreciate the support for the protection of the media from external political pressure, and we believe that the suppression of the traditional ‘marketplace of ideas’ and the enforcement of self-censorship should also be regarded as such pressure.

However, we found several points in the proposal that should be refined or reconsidered so that their meaning contributes to the mission and objectives that were at the origin of the idea to introduce the regulation. We are of the opinion that the primary concern must be to strike a balance between the existing national arrangements of the Member States and the harmonisation level, i.e. that in no case should existing national standards be decreased.

As regards the general principles established by the draft regulation, namely that the Commission will issue implementing rules to ensure its implementation, we believe that this intended principle should be reconsidered very carefully and then revised for the sake of preserving the democratic principles of European society.

From a purely practical point of view, we see Article 6 (2) and the related introductory provision (20) as problematic, as we are concerned that the application of the provision on the requirement of editorial independence would bring possible complications in practice, leading to questions as to which person is ultimately responsible. Editorial independence is a fundamental condition of democracy and guarantees the possibility of unrestricted and critical public debate. We consider any interference in the relationship between the publisher and the editorial team through EU regulation to be counterproductive and detrimental to media freedom and pluralism. Editorial independence should strictly distinguish between the individual decisions of the editor (these decisions must remain free from any influence) and the general line of editorial activity, which is the responsibility of the broadcaster or the editorial management. However, we are of the opinion that this disparity could be resolved simply in principle if the text of this Article becomes a soft law recommendation.

According to the Amsterdam Protocol, the organisation and definition of public services, as well as their financing, is a national competence. The regulation of public service therefore varies from state to state and it is a very sensitive area. It might even be worth considering the option to support the text of Article 5 (3) ‘Safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media providers’ more strongly by making explicit reference to the principles of the Amsterdam Protocol in the term ‘public service remit’.

Article 8 establishes the European Board for Media Services (the “Board”). The proposed regulation must explicitly ensure that the Board is an independently functioning body (including independence from the European Commission) capable of taking its own decisions as a collective body bringing together independent bodies to ensure the implementation of the relevant provisions for independent media. Therefore, it must be guaranteed the power to manage its internal affairs, such as creating its own procedural rules. The independence of this body will thus also result from its organisational set-up. We are of the opinion that if the Board takes a view different from that of the European Commission, it must be within its remit to present such a view and not to align its opinions with the European Commission. We also consider the further provision that the Board draws up opinions in agreement with the European Commission to be, at the very least, unfortunately worded.

With regard to the extended supervision of mergers of companies contained in Section 5, we believe in this respect that the existing level and system of regulation is fully sufficient and that there is no need for further EU regulation and we are of the opinion that it should be up to the national states themselves to best assess the impact of the transaction on possible media pluralism. We consider any intervention in this area in the form of the proposed regulation, including through the powers conferred on the European Board for Media Services, to be unnecessary and counterproductive. The provisions dealing with media concentration in the draft regulation are based on the assumption that media concentration is primarily detrimental to media pluralism. But consolidation in the media market is a natural and necessary part of the market environment in which media companies operate. Consolidation is in many cases necessary for sound business management and economic decision-making by business entities. Such decisions are often directed at how to adapt to a dynamic environment or avoid negative economic impacts on a particular company, how to secure jobs and, ultimately, how to safeguard media pluralism. Any further restrictions and requirements concerning the ability of media to merge would further exacerbate the asymmetry between traditional media houses and big-tech platforms in the battle for identical advertisers. Regulation that would impose further restrictions on mergers and acquisitions would not promote media pluralism – on the contrary, it would hinder it.

We also appreciate that the text of Recital 45 of the justification explicitly addresses the issue of audience measurement and its impact on media funding, stating that audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, and perceives the asymmetry between traditional media service providers and new players in the market (particularly online platforms). However, in our view, this perception is unfortunately not reflected in the wording of Article 23, as its text does not correspond to the objectives set out in the Recital, namely that access to objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions should be provided, taking into account the competition that takes place in the market not only between the same types of media but also between the aforementioned groups of competitors. In a situation where some competitors use their own audience measurement solutions that are not subject to market control and are not sufficiently transparent, it is imperative that Article 23 be further clarified to meet the objectives and ideas contained in the Recital. The latest available draft version of this provision still lacks an explicit reference to the principles of industry standards, self-regulation and market governance. A deeper impact analysis still needs to be carried out concerning the newly proposed obligation to provide viewership data free of charge to media service providers in relation to their content and services.

Finally, a last remark on the audience measurement provision of Article 23: we assume that with respect to the practical application, the use of cookies will be allowed for these purposes.

PUBLIC SERVICE MEDIA SHOULD NOT PROFIT FROM ADVERTISING, SAYS THE ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCIAL TELEVISION

Media manager Klára Brachtlová has been the head of the Association of Commercial Television (AKTV) for a year. The Association was founded by the Nova, Prima, and Óčko TV groups seven years ago. In an interview, Klára Brachtlová reveals how the Association helps TV stations, how broadcasters are coping with the advent of artificial intelligence, and why commercial media opposed the amendment to the law that increases fees for Česká televize (Czech Television, ČT).

AKTV celebrates its seventh birthday and you have been in office for a year. How would you evaluate this period? What went well? And is there anything that hasn’t worked?

Seven years ago, AKTV was established as a brand-new common platform for commercial television with the aim of becoming a partner to state institutions in the development of legislation and being a unified ‘voice’ for television. We know our sector and are able to assess well and quickly the potential impact of external influences, such as legislation. The second pillar of our activities has been to promote television as an advertising media type.

What was your focus?

Initially, we placed more emphasis on promoting television as an advertising medium, communicating the latest trends from around the world, and educating people on what works best on television. We are members of multinational European industry associations, so we have a lot of global information and bring it to the Czech market. However, over time more and more emphasis is put on the role of AKTV as a partner in legislative and regulatory processes.

Is it because more and more media laws are being prepared?

Quite a lot of media-related legislation is currently being drafted in the Czech Republic and more is coming to us from Brussels where more than two-thirds of the regulations concerning the European region are being prepared. So over time, our activities have shifted a lot towards Brussels so that we could monitor the EU’s media regulation priorities at an early stage, and I think we are successful in this respect. One example is probably the last EU action before the elections, the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). This is something where we were at the very beginning.

At the very beginning? How exactly? Did you comment on the document?

We have already been to the first consultations and Commissioner Věra Jourová presented us with the initial proposition of the document. Although this is another media regulation that we do not welcome enthusiastically in the already heavily regulated audiovisual media sector, the final version of the EMFA seems to be a reasonable compromise.

Will it have some positive effects?

That remains to be seen. For example, Brussels has recognised that in all areas where effective self-regulation exists in EU Member States, self-regulation can be preferred to regulation in the topics covered by EMFA. This includes topics such as the protection of freedom of the press.

And what about restrictions?

Television and radio have already been highly regulated industries, so we don’t see major changes yet. EMFA is a set of tools that are activated at some point. One example is the purchase of media, which in many cases is a below-the-limit transaction not subject to the approval of the Office for the Protection of Competition. EMFA puts in place mechanisms to prevent, for example, a large group threatening media pluralism in a particular region.

Is it in effect?

Last week (17 April), the EMFA was published in the EU’s Official Journal and will apply from August 2025. Now the Member States have their work cut out for them. They have to look at how they will be affected by EMFA, which laws will have to be amended and how. In the Czech Republic, we do not even know yet who will be responsible for the various parts of the Act.

In seven years, you have managed, for example, to suppress storage sites like Ulož.to and to enforce the protection of Prima and Nova’s works in court. What are you facing now?

Unfortunately, illegal sharing of our content is still a hot topic. As far as legislation is concerned, there are some shifts; last year, an amendment to the Copyright Act came into force, which aims to better protect copyright works. We are also seeing shifts in the rhetoric of state officials. They have finally started to see piracy as a real issue that is causing a huge amount of money to leak out, not only for content creators but also for the state.

What amounts are we talking about?

From hundreds of millions to several billions per year. It should be taken into consideration that economic damage is also caused to institutions such as the Czech Film Fund or the National Film Archive, which exercise and trade the rights to large libraries of Czech films.

Finally, piracy is part of the grey economy and tax evasion can also occur because the operators of so-called storage sites are often based outside the Czech Republic. Nobody denies that, but nobody really wants to meddle in this phenomenon because it is a complex matter. The biggest problem we have is judicial enforcement.

The technical aspects of illegal content distribution are evolving faster than the courts are deciding.

Yes, that is definitely a problem. If we want to protect one TV season and, say, the three most attractive titles in court, we are talking about litigation for several years. But in the meantime, we have other seasons running. So this route is not efficient enough for us at the moment and is difficult to use.

Are you ready for the arrival of artificial intelligence?

Technological development is relentless, and I hardly know anyone who hasn’t tried one of the artificial intelligence (AI) tools. It is undeniable that in all fields, including media, the use of AI offers a huge opportunity. For us, for example, it is in the areas of content editing, analytics tools or content quality control. It can be and has already been used for content creation but in this respect, I would be cautious because these generative models only work with what already exists, what they have “learned” somewhere.

A separate issue is the so-called deep fake, where an existing person is exploited, in the field of both photography and video, and we don’t even know about it. The media is already starting to face this, not only in the textual use of AI but also in image misuse. One such case is now being dealt with by colleagues at Prima. They have had a CNN Prima News story misused.

Television is probably affected a lot as anything can be remade there. On the other hand, on Prima, for example, AI has started subtitling programmes for the audience with visual and hearing impairments.

The use of artificial intelligence for the preparation of audio descriptions is a very effective way to make broadcasts accessible to as many disabled viewers as possible. Colleagues at Nova use AI to create additional sports content, such as highlights.

Is it supported by legislation?

In the EU, the so-called AI Act is being finalised, which deals with AI in a rather general way and does not yet address the issue of copyright. The European representation is saying: yes, we will complete this law and, in the period ahead, we will look at how AI will affect other areas and, if necessary, give it more precise rules.

How is the media perceiving this?

From the media’s point of view, it is primarily a matter of self-regulation and ethical use of these tools. That is, if we use AI to create content, it should be clearly labelled from the perspective of the user or viewer.

The UK’s BBC, for example, goes even further and says that the viewer or user should know why AI was used in a given case. This is a huge challenge and opportunity for the whole world, including the media, but we need to be very careful how, at what point in time, and for what purpose we use these tools.

Won’t AI move to a different level long before the legislative process begins?

Of course, legislation cannot keep up with this rapid development; self-regulation is and will be crucial.

The trend in television viewing is changing, time-shifted viewing is on the rise, people no longer wait in front of the TV in the evening but watch their favourite shows when they have time. How are commercial TV stations reacting to this?

Yes, it is a global trend, television is undergoing a long-term transformation as the way we watch content changes. Audiences are less with traditional linear TV, which they tend to use to watch live content, such as news and sports. They are more likely to watch other content at a time they choose and on devices other than the traditional TV screen.

Is TV changing then?

Television is actually a very modern and flexible medium; in addition to classic linear broadcasting, we can get content to viewers through services such as VOYO or prima+, which extends our reach to include younger target groups for whom the TV screen is no longer the centre of the living room and family entertainment.

So linear TV is not going to disappear, is it?

Definitely not. In the United States, we are even seeing a kind of over-saturation and fatigue with the plethora of content on hundreds of VOD platforms and a return of viewers to traditional television. However, it is clear that linear TV is gradually being replaced by other ways of watching content, and commercial broadcasters are adapting their distribution mix accordingly.

This is a trend, and it is going faster in Western Europe than, for example, in the regions of Central and Eastern Europe. Over time, the target group that will consume the content is also changing. But its charm, broadcasting now and here, will remain.

The way we watch TV is changing. Are there any changes for advertising or advertisers as well?

Television still offers the biggest reach to advertisers, it is an effective branding tool. The best proof of this is the fact that even e-commerce brands are among the biggest TV advertisers because online presence and communication are not enough for them. We have recently completed a study in AKTV under our ScreenVoice brand on the attention viewers pay to advertising.

It is proven that the more attention a message can attract, the better it is remembered. And that in turn has a secondary effect on your purchasing decisions. Television advertising came out best in the comparison because, unlike internet advertising, people cannot skip it and they see it much more often on the big TV screen, so they get a good perception of the brand.

Now everything is speeding up. Is there a move away from 30-second ads to shorter sponsor messages? Are the ad blocks getting shorter?

Television is narrative, in a longer spot you tell a story perfectly and convey emotion, moving or entertaining the audience. In addition, viewers see the advertising message alongside their favourite content, which is also a big advantage. This is much harder to do in a shorter spot or sponsorship message. But of course, it depends on what the advertiser wants to achieve in a particular campaign.

At the beginning of September, the Minister of Culture introduced an amendment to the Czech Television and Czech Radio Act, which regulates the amount of fees. AKTV demands its withdrawal. Why? Have AKTV’s representatives had any talks with the Minister of Culture or other politicians? What specific changes have they put forward? How successful have they been?

The Ministry of Culture held a press conference to present an amendment that no one had any idea about. Together with other colleagues from the commercial media, we objected to the proposal because it would be good if such a fundamental amendment was discussed with all the market players concerned.

It may look like this only applies to public service media, but it doesn’t. Public service media are part of a fragile ecosystem, a dual system, which also includes commercial media. The dual system is important for maintaining media pluralism. For the media sector to be sustainable and predictable for all players, the implications of the changes under consideration need to be well thought out.

Is that why you are asking the ministry to open a discussion?

Yes, that is why we have asked the Ministry of Culture to put the legislative process on hold and to start an expert discussion. This happened, and working groups were set up, one for television and one for radio.

We started working at the end of January when we basically exchanged arguments on what we consider essential for the functional coexistence of public and commercial media. We are still waiting for feedback, the Ministry of Culture is obviously working on something but unfortunately, we don’t know the current situation.

Why are you protesting? What is this all about?

As I said, public and commercial media stand side by side. And each has a different mission. The mission of public service media should be enshrined in a proper definition of public service, and we say: let us look at the definition of public service.

Can you be a little more specific?

In our opinion, it is appropriate to ask whether ČT should invest huge sums of money in, for example, very expensive sports competitions that are usually broadcast abroad by commercial sports channels. It is understandable that if viewers have become accustomed to such free content available on ČT4, it would be very unpopular to stop broadcasting it.

This takes us back to the public service and its definition. And the second key issue for us is the sustainable financing of all entities in the media ecosystem. Commercial media are dependent on advertising revenue for their livelihood. That is why we believe that public service media should be funded either by licence fees or by the state budget and should not have the tendency or the possibility to profit and generate revenues from advertising.

Are you waiting for a response from the ministry?

Yes, at the moment, we are waiting for the Ministry of Culture to give us an update. We are still hoping to reach a compromise result that will ultimately ensure the sustainable functioning of both commercial and public media. This is also a topical issue with regard to the EMFA we have talked about. One part of it concerns the functioning of public service media and the sustainability of their funding. So it needs comprehensive consideration and honest effort.

Are there representatives of ČT in the working group?

Of course, there are Czech Television and Czech Radio and also representatives of other commercial media there. We are there together.

From a layman’s point of view, you seem to work to remove advertising from ČT and cut its profits.

We are asked whether we want to eliminate the public media. That is certainly not our goal. For us, coexistence with them is very important, especially in today’s complex geopolitical situation. We have been saying the same thing from the beginning. Let’s look at this conceptually, let’s define the role of the public service media, and then we will work out how much money they need.

Not the other way around, we will add two billion and you will tell us what you will do for it. We don’t want to weaken ČT by taking away advertising, that is only a small part of it. In terms of commercial messages, the bigger issue for us is sponsorship. The sponsorship messages on ČT are now almost interchangeable with the advertising block. Although the law is not breached, it is de facto being circumvented in this way, and we do not think that this is how it was originally intended.

Your next topic is the transformation of the Czech Film Fund. What stage is the process at? And are you also working with the Ministry of Culture on it?

Yes, this process was exactly the opposite. For the transformation of the Audiovisual Fund, the Ministry invited us to a debate and a working group was formed before it was officially established. Negotiations continued for almost a year, and on some points, a fairly reasonable compromise was found.

However, in our opinion, for some others, the discussion was not completed, and the ministry suddenly came up with a proposal which it has already sent to the legislative process. But there are problematic points in the amendment that I would call almost discriminatory.

Can you give us an example?

The fund is financed by contributions from commercial entities, TV stations, operators, cinema operators and, in the future, VOD platform operators. Until now, the biggest contributor has been commercial TV, and our fee has been defined as a percentage of advertising revenue for traditional linear TV and also a minimum collection of CZK 150 million.

This means that if that percentage of advertising revenue didn’t add up to 150 million, the commercial TV stations had to pay 150 million. For example, in the COVID period when the commercial TV stations were really in trouble because of the outflow of advertising revenue, we also paid 150 million.

Will this change?

Commercial TV is the only one that has that minimum threshold. We have sincerely hoped that when the whole system of support for audiovisual content is being reconfigured this would be an ideal opportunity to level the playing field and not discriminate one media type against another or one type of taxpayer against another. The Ministry of Culture understands this but unfortunately, this discriminatory principle is still enshrined in the law.

What will the law change?

In the proposal, we appreciate that under the new system of operation, foreign VOD operators should also contribute to the fund. Until now, we were the only ones to pay for VOYO and prima+. On the other hand, services such as YouTube or Facebook, which do not meet the legal definition but which undoubtedly contain a large amount of audiovisual content, are not subject to the levy.

So that is another discriminatory element, local players have to make contributions from advertising revenue on web platforms while the big multinational players are not affected. It is probably also food for thought that not all the players who draw incentives and benefit from the state support system for audio-visual content are contributing to the system. On the positive side, however, the amendment should finally make it possible for us as the largest investors in audiovisual content in the Czech Republic to draw support for television formats.

Officials understand that sharing illegal content also leads to the leakage of government money. With the rapid development of artificial intelligence, legislation cannot keep up.

Author: Jitka Venturová

Source: idnes.cz

THE ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCIAL TELEVISION CELEBRATES 7 YEARS, KLÁRA BRACHTLOVÁ REMAINS ITS PRESIDENT

The Association of Commercial Television is celebrating its seventh anniversary this spring. Its main priorities remain the promotion of TV as an advertising media type, the fight against internet piracy and participation in legislative processes affecting the business of commercial broadcasters. Klára Brachtlová, Chief External Affairs of CME, the owner of TV Nova, remains its president for another year.

For seven years, the Nova, Prima and Óčko television groups have been members of the Association of Commercial Television, which was founded to unite the voices of commercial broadcasters.

One of the main activities of the Association is the promotion of television as an advertising medium. For this purpose, AKTV has created the ScreenVoice brand and a website of the same name, providing interested media agencies and advertisers with the latest information and trends from the world of television advertising. In addition to foreign content, interested parties can also find a range of original texts on various attractive topics on the website.

“The most popular content on the ScreenVoice website has long been myths and facts about television where we debunk the most common prejudices against television. Readers are offered data and arguments proving that television is an effective advertising medium and, in many cases, still has absolutely unparalleled performance compared to other media types,”

says Klára Brachtlová, President of AKTV.

Last year AKTV became a partner of the most important industry conference Forum Media whose participants had the opportunity to learn about the findings of AKTV research on the topic of attention in advertising. On the occasion of World Television Day on 21 November, AKTV prepared a unique programme for its business partners, which culminated in the entertainment show We Love TV hosted by Libor Bouček.

Another focus of activities is the role of AKTV as a partner in the legislative field, at both national and European levels. In the past period, AKTV has been actively involved in the process of drafting several pieces of legislation, in particular the amendment to the Audiovisual Act and the major media amendment.

“Sustainability and a fair playing field for all players in the media market are absolutely crucial for us. That’s why one of our top priorities remains the fight against online piracy, which drains significant resources from the creative ecosystem. Instead of going back to the creators, this revenue goes into the pockets of the repository operators where piracy is most rampant,”

adds Klára Brachtlová.

To spread awareness about the illegality of sharing copyrighted content, AKTV operates a special section on its website dedicated to copyright where interested parties can find information on legal and illegal content consumption, a glossary of terms, or the latest copyright news.