The National Telecommunications Commission is considering to require licenses for content creators when they recently released a draft of a memorandum circular. At first glance, it would seem that the document refer to telecommunication developers. However, in the definition of words, we can see that it MAY cover online content developers and that would probably include us, the normal internet users.
Content developers were therein defined as "persons or entities creating contents;" while content referring to "all types of contents delivered to/accessed by the users/subscribers such as music, ring tones, logos, video clips, etc." Now for example, a student makes a short video presentation for her class and decides to upload it to the class e-group, for better accessibility. Does that automatically make her a content developer? Well, she did create the content which is accessed by users of the e-group, right? Now wouldn't that definition just subject us ALL to the licensing requirements?
Of course, the MC seems to direct its application only to commercial content developers. So that means content developers who derive profit from creating contents. Ah! But what if, as in the usual trend now, I write blog articles and get paid for every view that I get. That certainly makes me a commercial content developer, which means that, under the MC, I will have to pay P6,000 annually!
Maybe the NTC should consider a second draft, for better definition of words and for a clear scope of its application. And in addition, they should consider the feasibility of enforcement of such regulation device. I certainly hope that the public hearing did not go as chaotic as I imagine it would be.
Content developers were therein defined as "persons or entities creating contents;" while content referring to "all types of contents delivered to/accessed by the users/subscribers such as music, ring tones, logos, video clips, etc." Now for example, a student makes a short video presentation for her class and decides to upload it to the class e-group, for better accessibility. Does that automatically make her a content developer? Well, she did create the content which is accessed by users of the e-group, right? Now wouldn't that definition just subject us ALL to the licensing requirements?
Of course, the MC seems to direct its application only to commercial content developers. So that means content developers who derive profit from creating contents. Ah! But what if, as in the usual trend now, I write blog articles and get paid for every view that I get. That certainly makes me a commercial content developer, which means that, under the MC, I will have to pay P6,000 annually!
Maybe the NTC should consider a second draft, for better definition of words and for a clear scope of its application. And in addition, they should consider the feasibility of enforcement of such regulation device. I certainly hope that the public hearing did not go as chaotic as I imagine it would be.
1 comment:
lakihan mo naman font mo, please?
Post a Comment