Television on mobiles: French perspectives 
Francis Beck, Member of the Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel (CSA), France 

Television on mobile phones must be regulated 

Television broadcasting on mobiles covers a variety of contents and reception modes. A distinction must be made between:

• video on mobiles in the broadest sense as it already exists, specifically in operators’ 3G offers, in the form of video images (music videos, animated sequences, programme excerpts) which can be downloaded or viewed in streaming on a mobile phone. Sometimes they may be “real” television programmes, or even already existing channels on cable or satellite.
• mobile television in the strict sense, which is in either the launch (Japan and South Korea) or experimental stages. This involves accessing continuously broadcast television channels by means of a portable receiver.       

While video on mobiles may make use of the telecommunications network on the basis of a point-to-point connection, mobile television would use the same broadcasting network as fixed television (which, unlike the telecommunications network, is dedicated to “point-to-multipoint” transmissions). This is because, in order to broadcast continuously the same programme to a wide audience, it seems at present to be more competitive to cover an area with a television transmitter than to make use of an individualized connection via the telecommunications network (even if technologies such as MMDS diminish this difference). 

Freedom 

Mobile television technologies need to mature further. Mobile television in the strict sense calls for regulation, in the same way as fixed television, with the same aims: to guarantee the freedom of speech and the consumer’s freedom of choice. 

On the other hand, not all mobile video calls for regulation. Only video services, which are real television services in line with the definition given by law, call for this.

Mobile TV is intended for a number of different devices and is not restricted to television on mobile phones. The mobile television receiver can be a mobile phone, but not necessarily. It may be a dedicated terminal placed in a car, or a laptop or a PDA. 

• Thus, the advent of mobile television may be driven by two factors:
• a transformation of the TV set, which will be liberated from being wired in, as happened with radio 30 years ago, and will become easily transportable, making possible new consumption situations for the television medium;· a convergence of television, Internet and telephony in the mobile universe, thanks to access to increasingly high data trans-mission rates and the rapid development of triple-play offerings.       

The potential diversity of reception modes will probably be encouraged by the fact that more than one broadcasting network may offer mobile television: the mobile telephone network (in certain conditions), the terrestrial broad-casting network, the satellite, mixed satellite/terrestrial (with terrestrial return).

Many forms of mobile TV broad-casting coexist today, contributing to this diversity: DVB-H, DMB-S, DMB-T, etc.

The advantages and disadvantages of these standards need to be analysed with respect to the following parameters:

• bandwidth requirements and the availability of the latter;
• roll-out costs;
• compatible frequency bands and the space available in them.       

Spectrum 

The CSA (Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel – High Broadcasting Council) is mandated to allocate broadcasting frequencies, a scarce resource, and those players wishing to develop mobile television are concerned that room should be made for it in the frequency plan. A request for frequencies has been made by three consortia wishing to conduct mobile television trials in Paris using the DVB-H standard, and there has also been a request for trials using the DMB-T standard. The Council is giving favourable consideration to the coordinated temporary allocation, for a period of several months, of two trial frequencies in Paris to the three DVB-H consortia, once an agreement has been reached to regroup two of the consortia on one frequency.

Initial surveys have shown that there is no room in the broadcasting spectrum in bands IV–V for more than one mobile television network, and even then this network is not guaranteed national coverage comparable with that of fixed television because of the technical constraints associated with DVB-H.

In addition, it is necessary to take into account other uses of television (HDTV, local TV) which are competing with mobile television for access to these frequencies.

It is worth considering the opportunities offered by the whole range of broadcasting modes and standards if this makes it possible to use frequency bands other than bands IV and V for which the DVB-H standard is intended.

The shutdown of analogue terrestrial television, scheduled for 2010–12, could appreciably relax the constraint of spectrum scarcity, but a fair number of players have already signified their interest in the frequencies that will be released. 

The Regional Radiocommunication Conference to be held by the European States in 2006 in order to plan the post-analogue use of the spectrum will propose an initial allocation of the French spectrum and the “digital dividend”, determining the number of networks available and, possibly, their use for mobile reception involving specific planning parameters.

Economic model 

Observation of the situation in the countries furthest advanced in this field confirms that the mobile television business model needs to be validated and that the sharing of the value of the market is still raising problems. The economic model or models, pricing, the role of the distributor, etc. are still to be confirmed.

Crucial questions are whether content is to be free or paying and the revenue expected by telecoms operators from content-linked 3G service. In Japan and Korea a free project and a pay project coexist. Free or partially free access to mobile TV is an issue in particular in the case of frequencies whose use has been free of charge hitherto (unlike the 3G frequencies acquired at great expense by mobile operators).

Whatever the distributor’s role, cooperation between the players is all-important in combining the strong points of telephony and television, in offering suitable content, in creating a mutually stimulating effect between the offer of terminals and the offer of content (the chicken or the egg!) and in achieving a share of the value of the market enabling everyone to obtain fair remuneration. At present, the European environment is highly competitive. This is a crucial issue for the public authorities.

Should preference be given to an integrated organizational structure of the players, or not? Should the offer be open to all service and content providers (cf. the success of i-mode) or a walled garden (on the lines of the 3G operators’ offer)? In that case, what part will be played by the control and the access to broadcasting rights of key content? An important question for the regulator.

pj / ep