Where that NTC Circular might affect Bloggers?

When I first read about that proposed NTC circular about “Guidelines on the Provision of Contents, Information, Applications, and Electronic Games“, I shrugged it off because it was obviously referring to the mobile telecoms industry.

However, there were a lot of allegations flying around that this will affect all the millions of bloggers, forum posters, Friendster users and YouTubers in the Philippines if the NTC will require them to pay a license fee (amounting to Php6,300USD 107INR 9,101EUR 102CNY 782). So, I took a second and third look and re-read the definitions.

And while the definition of Content Developers was very broad (“persons or entities creating contents“), NTC’s definition of Content (“all types of contents delivered to/accessed by the users/subscribers such as music, ring tones, logos, video clips, etc.“) was obviously focused on mobile content and not content over the internet.

However, we can also make an argument that with the proliferation of mobile 3G, blog content and video clips from YouTube are also accessible via mobile phones. That holds true with email (iPhone Mail, GMail for Mobile, Yahoo! Go). The most prudent course of action was to ask the proponents of the circular what they meant by all these and who are specifically covered by it, which, Romeo Rabajante Jr. did (I applaud him for doing so):

I e-mailed NTC asking regarding this issue and Mr. Edgardo V. Cabarios director of Common Carriers Authorization Department of NTC replied to my e-mail. He said:

“Sir,

The proposed rules apply to those who offer contents, information, applications and/or electronic games to the public for compensation. If the contents, information, application and/or electronic games are free, then the providers are not covered by the proposed rules.

Edgardo Cabarios”

That explains the line in the memo that says “further encourage the development of contents, information applications and electronic games, the prevailing access charge regime between the contents, information, applications and electronic games providers and the networks providers which is revenue sharing should be replaced by fixed access charge” (emphasis mine).

Going back to the memorandum again, it also states that those are applying should provide the following documents:

1) Valid registration from the Securities and Exchange Commission or from the Department of Trade and Industry and Articles of Incorporation
2) Facilities lease agreement with duly enfranchised and certificated public telecommunications entity

Unless some blogger out there has applied a business license with the DTI and incorporated their blogs as a business entity with the SEC as well as signed facilities lease agreement with a telco, no one here is eligible. That supports the clarification that only those who are directly charging for their content are covered. I have yet to see a blog in the Philippines that follow the paid/subscription model although I’ve once talked somebody out of doing so.

About a year ago, a mobile content and service provider approached me and proposed a syndication deal for my blogs. The set up was something like that of the Amazon Kindle model — provide unlimited access to blog content via mobile device at a monthly flat rate. That rates were something like Php10USD 0.17INR 14EUR 0.16CNY 1 to Php20USD 0.34INR 29EUR 0.32CNY 2 a month to be able to read a blog via the mobile phone without additional access charges (i.e. free 3G connection).

It was a sound business model actually — instead of paying Php10USD 0.17INR 14EUR 0.16CNY 1 per 30 minutes (Php5USD 0.09INR 7EUR 0.08CNY 0.62/15mins), you only pay a one-time monthly fee to get unlimited access. Of course, there’s some sort of profit sharing there.

In that situation, the blogger becomes the Content Developer; the other party being the Content Providers as per the definition and therefore be covered by such proposed rules.

In its current form, I don’t see the proposed memorandum to gravely affect bloggers and publishers in general. What may need some more clarification would be professional bloggers charging their readers for reading their content. This might actually be more relevant to those people selling ebooks, online learning courses, web seminars and the like since they charge for access to content or gets a fee for providing services and the like.

Back in 2007, there was actually a draft memo by the NTC to regulate all forms of Internet content by classifying it as a value-added service (VAS) and charge fees accordingly. I supposed that memo was scrapped (see Unlawyer’s explanation here) altogether. Now that one could have direct effect to all bloggers.