Like the layers in a digitally composited image, the coexistence of the TV Launch Fest with the latest news on JumpTV is forced and, in this case, out of synch.

In a business where timing is everything, could the Copyright Board have picked a worse time to say ‘OK’ to a hearing on JumpTV? When broadcasters and specialties are gulping over money spent on programs from Hollywood and even on Cancon, and trumpeting their schedules to anyone with a media buying budget or byline, is it not cruel to contemplate the advent of the next iCrave?

That depends: exactly what kind of threat does JumpTV pose anyway?

JumpTV.com has been streaming video since May 1 from a few TV services which it says it has licensed. Headed by lawyer and Montreal-based businessman Farrel Miller, Jump has also applied to the Copyright Board to be heard on the subject of whether the Board will – or is even mandated to – set a tariff which would, according to Miller, recognize Jump’s right to be treated as a signal retransmitter like cable, satellite and wireless services. Jump wants to stream CBC, CTV and Global TV, among others, online. Miller says he’s willing to pay a tariff for that right, but he wouldn’t have subscribers; his business case is based on selling ads online.

Cablers pay Canadian over-the-air broadcasters a tariff of 70 cents per cable subscriber for the right to distribute their signals. But cablecos are not permitted to alter the signal – the broadcaster packages the programs and ads and sends the whole shebang to the distributor. When Canadian and U.S. shows are simulcast, cablers send the Canadian version out on both the Canadian and U.S. feeds so viewers here see only Canadian ads.

Given Jump’s ability to change those Canadian signals and its unwillingness to respect the strictures governing cable – well, Miller has effectively handed his opponents very large glasses, tinted neon red. The Media Content Coalition, made up of Canadian writers, film and TV producers and broadcasters, says even if Miller has the technology to restrict viewing of Canadian signals to people within Canada, he doesn’t have the right to alter the signal.

The coalition says it sees a ‘real opportunity’ for the TV biz to avoid the mistakes made with Napster. But it argues the fair way to do so is through an orderly window release system wherein content owners control exploitation.

Epitome Pictures’ Stephen Stohn, chair of the CFTPA’s copyright committee, says Epitome is exploring the ‘walled garden’ concept with casters, where Net subscribers would get an encrypted signal which they could unscramble.

But the Copyright Board may not have jurisdiction in this case. It will have to determine at the public hearing in December whether JumpTV falls under Section 31 of the Act. If so, a new world will open up in the rules governing retransmission of all kinds. If not, the question will remain as to which federal agency, if any, has jurisdiction over licensed intellectual property moving to the Net.