Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
EU Communications Media Movies Television The Internet Entertainment

EU To Move Ahead With Cultural Quotas For Streaming Services (techcrunch.com) 350

Posted by BeauHD from the preferential-treatment dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: The European Union is set to move ahead with a plan to enforce pan-European quotas on streaming services like Amazon Prime Video and Netflix to support production of locally produced film and video content. Roberto Viola, the European Commission's directorate general of communication, networks, content and technology told Variety that the new rules are on track to be approved in December. The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided (individual EU Member States could choose to set the content bar even higher, at 40%).

Streaming services will also have to ensure visibility and prominence for local content -- so no burying the 'European third' in a dingy corner of the site where no one will find it, let alone stream it. The EU lawmakers' intention is to stand up for cultural diversity against the might of Hollywood and the flattening power of platforms -- in the latter case by making platforms invest in local content production rather than just doing the easy thing of fencing yet more Marvel superhero movies.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU To Move Ahead With Cultural Quotas For Streaming Services More

EU To Move Ahead With Cultural Quotas For Streaming Services

Comments Filter:

  • Yeah I'm sure this will work. (Score:5, Funny)

    by xevioso ( 598654 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @05:34PM (#57259776)

    They will quickly find, much to their chagrin, that people will still end up watching Marvel movies rather than some movie about everyone in a French village being struck with a devastating plague of ennui.

    • cancon has been around for long time even saga channel had to have it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        Yeah and cancon is pretty much reviled by most people in Canada, because it produces nothing of worthwhile. It's simply a waste of tax dollars to create/promote culture. Something that in and of itself is organic.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by lgw ( 121541 )

      They will quickly find, much to their chagrin, that people will still end up watching Marvel movies rather than some movie about everyone in a French village being struck with a devastating plague of ennui.

      What kind of talk is that? We all know a central committee with a five year plan knows better what the consumer needs than th consumer himself. If the plan doesn't work perfectly, it can only be the fault of wreckers, or an unexpectedly cold winter.

      The fact that this measure will divert large sums of money from big companies to friends of the decision makers is a total coincidence, of course, and this is totally not a tariff on digital goods. And even if it were a tariff, the current president of the US

      • Re:Yeah I'm sure this will work. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ffkom ( 3519199 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @07:29PM (#57260454)

        We all know a central committee with a five year plan knows better what the consumer needs than the consumer himself.

        You mean, like the board of a global mega-corporation? After all, the detachment of decision-making from reality and customer demand in large corporations isn't that much different from the detachment of communist governments from the people.

        Also, the content of commercial productions is today totally dominated by the fear to try anything "original" that is too far off the mainstream, simply because return-on-investment isn't guaranteed and the 7th follow-up on a once successful movie is favored over any new story.

    • Re:Yeah I'm sure this will work. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @06:26PM (#57260070)

      How is this supposed to work anyway? Say Netflix has 3000 films available for streaming today in a particular country. Replacing a third of them would mean needing to find 1000 local films, which would likely require scraping the bottom of the barrel in the case of countries that lack a film scene. That's already problematic enough as it is, but let's ignore it for the moment. More worrying is that in some of these countries, the film scene likely isn't large enough to warrant more than a handful of distributors for theatrically-released, domestic films. This law—at least as it's explained in the summary—would seat those distributors in a disproportionate and unfair position at the negotiating table, since they know that Netflix has no choice but to work with them. They're basically being given the tools to extort Netflix legally.

      In many ways, this bears a striking similarity to another form of intellectual property: standards-essential patents that companies have no choice but to use if they want to build a product in that space. In the case of standards-essential patents, however, the rights holders are required to provide licenses for their patents under FRAND [wikipedia.org] terms in exchange for having their patents included in the standard. It seems to me like something similar should apply here: if the EU is effectively going to compel Netflix to license the rights to specific films, it's only fair that the rights holders to those films should be required to provide licenses under fair terms, lest they seek to take advantage of their propped up position.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by taustin ( 171655 )

        How is this supposed to work anyway? Say Netflix has 3000 films available for streaming today in a particular country. Replacing a third of them would mean needing to find 1000 local films, which would likely require scraping the bottom of the barrel in the case of countries that lack a film scene.

        Or, if they already have 100 local films, simply reducing the catalog of everything else to 300 titles, rotated on a regular (perhaps even daily) basis.

        Netflix and Amazon aren't going to be spending a dime more than they do now on European made stuff.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by arth1 ( 260657 )

          Or, if they already have 100 local films, simply reducing the catalog of everything else to 300 titles, rotated on a regular (perhaps even daily) basis.

          Netflix and Amazon aren't going to be spending a dime more than they do now on European made stuff.

          You're thinking short term. Yes, it's easier for Netflix and others to comply by chopping the US content until the EU content ratio becomes high enough, but that's stage one. EU lawmakers think a bit farther ahead than that, and realise that longer term, Netflix et al will be more likely to add a new European movie/series if that also means they get to add another US movie/series that makes them money. So the long term result is that EU movies and series will have an easier time being accepted, and EU cul

      • generally the rules are about new content not existing content.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by indytx ( 825419 )

        How is this supposed to work anyway? Say Netflix has 3000 films available for streaming today in a particular country. Replacing a third of them would mean needing to find 1000 local films, which would likely require scraping the bottom of the barrel in the case of countries that lack a film scene.

        This all makes more sense if you assume that this is motivated as a subsidy forced on an American company as a tax. If you are Netflix and want to operate in France, you have to negotiate for French films, and then you are stuck negotiating with some jerk, smoking a Gauloises, demanding more for the streaming rights of a crummy French "art" film than it is worth. Can't get 30%, then you have to cut your catalog. The French filmmaker will know this and act accordingly. This is just a power/money grab.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by taustin ( 171655 )

      Indeed. But after Netflix and Amazon meet the 30% quote by reducing everything else down to twice as much as the locally produced stuff, Marvel (and other Disney pap) movies will be about all that's left to watch.

      This will result in zero new production in Europe, and the increase in the streaming of European produced stuff will be lose in the noise.

    • They will quickly find, much to their chagrin, that people will still end up watching Marvel movies rather than some movie about everyone in a French village being struck with a devastating plague of ennui.

      In my limited exposure to French films, it seems that they are usually well made and photographed, but the dialog sucks or is unnecessarily obtuse.

      That said, I liked Luc Bessons' Nikita [wikipedia.org] ("La Femme Nikita") about as much as the American remake Point of No Return [wikipedia.org], (although I do think the dialog is better written in the American version) as well as his Angel-A [wikipedia.org]. Hm, maybe just like films by Luc Besson ...

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by naubol ( 566278 )
      I'm prepared to believe that some people will watch the content and that the law makers already understood that the rate of consumption would not be proportional. Chagrin seems unlikely.

    • Having seen Black Panther I think I'd go for the frogflick - it probably has a better plot & dialog plus a 75% chance of some gratuitous nudity.

  • Tariffs (Score:3)

    by MightyYar ( 622222 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @05:34PM (#57259778)

    These aren't anything like tariffs, so it's perfectly fine to get red in the face at Trump over those.

    • These aren't anything like tariffs, so it's perfectly fine to get red^h^h^h orange in the face at Trump over those.

      FTFY

  • Catalogue reductions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by enriquevagu ( 1026480 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @05:36PM (#57259798)

    Such quotas can be enforced in two ways: increasing the amount of local contents (as desired by the EU) or reducing the amount of foreign content.

    I predict massive reductions in the catalogue of Netflix in most European countries.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I can sympathize with the goal - a pure, global free market does tend to mean that a handful of global content producers (i.e. Hollywood) will crush any kind of regional cultural diversity with their economies of scale.

      But the obvious way to comply is to just add a lot of very cheap, low quality, locally produced filler. That's probably not what they're going for..

      • It doesn't work that way on the Internet though which is why these new media are so successful. You can put stuff for free on the Internet and let the market speak. Even if it's a tiny market, I can switch my account from Netflix to just about any content provider.

    • Such quotas can be enforced in two ways: increasing the amount of local contents (as desired by the EU) or reducing the amount of foreign content.

      . . . I predict 30% cheap, locally produced . . . porn.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by CaffeinatedBacon ( 5363221 )
        In today's episode of watching the grass grow in Germany...quick change to the French grass channel and see who is winning.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by taustin ( 171655 )

      I'm thinking that at any given time, the Hollywood stuff will be limited to about twice the local stuff that's available, but they'll rotate the catalog on a daily basis.

      Which means TV Guide may be making a comeback.

      • Couldn’t they circumvent it by splitting their service into multiple smaller services? Each one would have the same local content, but would have different foreign content.

        Regardless of whether or not they find viable loopholes, I can’t see this law benefitting consumers in any way.

    • Such quotas can be enforced in two ways

      Actually, there is only one way: you HAVE to cut content. The EU currently has 28 member countries and so if each of them has to have 30% local content then the ONLY way you can manage that is to restrict the content available in each country because if all the content you make is available in every country then any one country's share will be a lot less than 30%.

      To make matters worse the EU has very strict rules against restricting services between countries so, if you only allow a show to be seen in c

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ffkom ( 3519199 )
        I think the article got it wrong, of course one cannot expect a country like Malta (population ~400k) to produce 30% of a reasonable movie catalog. I am pretty sure this meant "30% content produced anywhere in the EU".

  • Woo hoo! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @05:37PM (#57259808)

    Canada had something similar in place 30 years ago - it gave us such gems as SCTV's "Great White North" and the movie "Strange Brew". Thanks to that I learned the difference between back bacon and side bacon, and developed an appreciation for Molson's!

    Take off, you Hollywood Hosers!

    • But it also means that Canadian radio has to play even more Justin Beiber.

      I think you might want to look at the overall outcomes instead of picking out a single (I say single since the movie uses the same characters from Great White North) instance where it worked out well.

    • Canada had something similar in place 30 years ago - it gave us such gems as SCTV's "Great White North" and the movie "Strange Brew".

      What it gave us was more commercial runtime per show. Commercials made in Canada count as original Canadian content. TV show production companies actually want to have less commercial runtime per episode, but they can't because of the Canadian law. We all have to watch more commercials so that Canadians can enjoy enough Canadian commercial content.

  • What does it even mean to "give over 30%" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @05:37PM (#57259816)

    I don't understand why technically Netflix is supposed to "give over" anything - can't they just ALSO host EU content? Is this rule really mandating that Netflix stop streaming some content even though technically they could steam any amount of content with enough server space?

    I mean, over here in America I'd love to see this content also, let everyone see it!

    I look forward to the new category in the Netflix TV app - right next to "Violent TV shows", or "Feel Good Reality TV" (both actual Netflix categories), they can add a new one "Dreck the EU Made Us Show You".

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by cshark ( 673578 )

      Well, yeah. The 30% number insures that you would have to have a finite and probably much smaller catalog in europe than the US. Politicians in the EU are certifiably stupid. Of course, there's not much better in the US.

    • The content still isn't free. And Netflix is put into a poor bargaining position with this - if the content is limited enough the EU studios are free to extort higher license fees. And to hit their quotas they will likely have to either increase subscription rates or shrink the catalog to stay competitive.

  • Question is, if european sourced content is so great, why bother with mandating netflix consume it? If the demand exists, why not create or fund a european service that sources primarily european entertainment?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      So EU movie and series makers have funds to make more EU content in the EU.
      Such EU laws force investment in new EU content.
      The paying for past EU movie and series to make up the "European sourced content"
      People want to enjoy very different content but the EU govs will force support to flow back to the EU "arts".

    • Because then the customer has to pay two subscriptions: one for netflix *and* one for the new european service.

  • Unintended consequences (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tomtomtom ( 580791 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @05:52PM (#57259914)
    I can't see how this can possibly work in eg Malta, Luxembourg and Cyprus, countries which are very small so will have almost no local content either back catalogue or current production. Just means Netflix etc will never do business there.

    • I'm pretty sure that, in EU parlance, "locally created" is shorthand for made in Italy or France.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Along as something is created on a EU location, has EU staff, used EU rented equipment and was in a EU nation language.
      Such protective EU laws keep an entire "arts" culture in work and working on EU gov enforced content creation.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TheSync ( 5291 )

      Just link to cool Malta videos [youtube.com] on YouTube.

  • Calling them "Culture Quotas" seems loaded (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @06:08PM (#57259984)
    these are quotas on locally produced content. I'm not surprised the EU would want them. It's not hard to see why smaller local studios can't compete with (let's be honest mostly US based) mega corporations.

    And it's not so much that nobody watches the local content as it's that nobody'll produce it because why spend money making content for 2 markets when you can do it for one and folks will watch by default.

    Hell, I wish we'd do this in America. Lately the dialog and plots in American movies suck balls because they have to be watered down to get past Chinese censors and/or be easy to dub over.

    • Not that loaded. France has had similar quotas in place on broadcast systems for decades, specifically to maintain their culture.

      • in that regard and pretty famous for it. And they make no bones about it, they don't want to lose French culture to the melting pot of globalization (waste of time in the Internet age if you ask me). I don't see that's what the EU is doing here. It just looks like an honest attempt to make sure home grown content doesn't get crushed by slick Hollywood production values.

  • Face value shows no more than 3 non EU players. With a billion and one loopholes and exceptions...

  • "Must Carry" was the FCC approach to local channels in the U.S. It gave the cable carriers a mandate that, if the local channel wanted, they could force the cable carrier to carry their channel... at no cost.

    Or... if the local channel insisted on being paid - keep in mind that the same channel is on the airwaves for "free", sponsored by advertising - then the cable carriers are not under that compulsion.

    Of course the local channels get in battles over the carriage fee, and instead now want a large payment,

  • In the 1920s, UK cinema was suffering from competition from the USA. In response, cinemas were told that 20% of films had to be British. The result of this was simple: companies started producing "quota quickies". Really low budget films that cinemas could buy cheaply and show, just to hit the quota. There's no reason Netflix won't do the same. Go to a company like Gaumont or Pathe and ask what they've got going cheap. Lousy films everyone has forgotten that were made in the 1950s and they'll put them on.

  • Aren't there EU laws regarding not being allowed to geofence their service?

    How do you give "30% local" to every EU country when you can't restrict the content by country?

  • Netflix gets into the porn business in EU countries.

    There are decades of "local" porn out of current EU members countries, and for all I know, lots of new ones being produced.

  • This is quite funny because there are several British TV shows I'd love to get here in the US but can't because of licensing issues. I'd love me some Red Dwarf but can't get it here in the US.
    I tried to go the UKTV streaming service and could get it here is Western US because their registration process requires a valid GB mail code.

  • Hold up. 30% of their content must come from each EU country.

    28÷3 = 9.3

    So either each country’s originals are banned from viewing in other countries, this law needs amending, or the math says they need ten times more content, without increasing their supply of content. The math simply can’t work as presented in the summary.

    From Variety,

    EU nations can each choose whether the 30% includes sub-quotas on original productions in their countries and whether they want to follow the German model o

  • Law of unintended consequences (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Miamicanes ( 730264 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @08:45PM (#57260820)

    What the EU intends: TV shows that remain faithful to the vision of each country's own distinct culture.

    What will really happen: Netflix films 20 new TV shows based on... what else... Marvel or DC Comics, but has them produced in the EU instead of the US or Canada. Except they all follow Hollywood norms, have casts fluent in English & are produced IN English(*) so they can be directly monetized as-is in the US and internationally, and end up practically extinguishing what's left of that country's "culturally distinct" film industry (because everyone involved with the country's film/tv industry ends up being too busy chasing after Netflix's money).

    Oh... and lots of low-budget reality-TV and game shows, because they're just about the only kind of show you CAN profitably make if your total market and language community only has a few million potential viewers.

    The thing lots of people overlook is that "Hollywood" isn't a place. It's not even necessarily AMERICAN anymore. It's a business model that has proven over time to be wildly profitable & has spread over the globe.

    Case in point: how would you classify the nationality of a TV show like "Game of Thrones"? Most of its cast members are European. Practically every scene was filmed in Europe. The CGI and production are done in Europe.

    ---

    (*) Or possibly, shoot scenes involving visibly-spoken dialogue twice, back to back... once in English, and once in the country's official language. It would cost more, but not THAT MUCH more since you'd be using the same cast (they're all bilingual, remember), the same CGI, and could do the editing workflow in parallel... and you'd end up with two versions, both of which were a first-quality original shot in their respective languages.

    I can't cite any specific examples, but I'm pretty sure this is ALREADY happening with big-budget Hollywood films co-produced with Chinese studios... two directors & casts [possibly with a few actors shared by both], shooting back to back using the same sets, extras, and CGI.

  • Yeah (Score:2)

    by Trogre ( 513942 )

    Because quotas worked out so well for the BBC.

  • Roberto Viola, the European Commissionâ(TM)s directorate [cambridge.org] general of communication, networks, content and technology

    He can't have much free time if he's an entire department by himself.

  • Not sure if this law actually got passed here or not, but I had a simple suggestion for Netflix. Just allow locals to post their own videos in a YouTube like section on the site. It won't take long to get thousands of videos that fill the quotas that the government wants. If you want local culture, then local people should produce it.

  • Meanwhile, in the UK... (Score:3)

    by SvnLyrBrto ( 62138 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @11:38PM (#57261364)

    The BBC produces a plethora of worthwhile content that not only stands and competes on its own merits; but is so sought-after that many people don't even wait for it to be legitimately available.

    Even in the '90s, before moving large video files around on the internet was feasible; things like Red Dwarf and old-school Doctor Who had huge and thriving bootleg PAL to NTSC converted VHS scenes. And when they re-introduced Doctor Who in 2005? Well, more than a few people started using BitTorrent that year, because BBC America was not available in their cable market at the time. Then there's Top Gear, Torchwood, Broadchurch, AbFab, Graham Norton, and Downton Abby, the original versions of The Office, Queer as Folk, and Skins, and of course the various iterations of BBC News.

    But no, EU; don't bother producing good content that can stand on it's own. Abuse the law to force crap content that no one wants on people. I'd bet if you find the money trail and follow it; there'd be some nicely large campaign contributions at the end.

  • Anime (Score:4, Interesting)

    by djinn6 ( 1868030 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @11:57PM (#57261438)
    Guess Crunchyroll's going to get kicked out of the EU. They're over 90% Japanese.

  • NOOOOOO!!!! PLEEASE GOOOD.... NOOOOO!!!!! (Score:3)

    by Mjlner ( 609829 ) on Thursday September 06, 2018 @05:42AM (#57262294) Journal

    Please stop this now!

    Coming from a relatively small country that produces only boring dramas and cheap, cheesy wannabe-hollywoodesque crap, this would be the end of all decent programming. Since my country is so small, there isn't enough titles to form the 30%, so Netflix and HBO would have to make up for it by removing existing titles and replacing it with utter shite.

    NOOO!!!!

Slashdot Top Deals

WARNING TO ALL PERSONNEL: Firings will continue until morale improves.

Close