From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: Americans on English schools in Quebec (Was: Quebec)
Originator: clamen@BYRON.SP.CS.CMU.EDU
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<BxvqzJ.77L.1@cs.cmu.edu> <BxxALE.B5K@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:55:46 GMT

In article <BxxALE.B5K@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:

   In article <BxvqzJ.77L.1@cs.cmu.edu> clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU writes:
   >
   >Quebec has no control over television shows, but there is nothing
   >preventing a Quebec company from buying the Quebec French rights and
   >dubbing shows.  In the case of the Simpsons, it is already dubbed :-),
   >so it should come out wonderfully in French.
   >
   >In the case of motion pictures, the LAW states that no foreign
   >language (ie. non-French) movie can be shown on more than one screen
   >in a viewing area (eg. Montreal) longer than 4 weeks if a
   >French-language version (subtitled or dubbed, always the latter) is
   >not made available as well.
   >
   >Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu

   See the comparison : with a LAW, something is done, i.e. a popular
   movie will be made available in a short time.  

There's a difference.  The number of companies that distribute films
in Quebec is very very small (it is less than 10), and generally
American.  Regulation would have been just about the only way to
"encourage" them to act differently, since they are nearly complete
control over American movie distribution.  As it was, Paramount was
upset and refused to supply video tapes of its movies to Quebec for at
least a year as a result of the regulation.

Overall, the regulation turned out not to have a serious affect on
availability.  Had it caused Montreal to be downgraded for a
First-Class North American movie city (ie. one that receives all the
big movies when they open in the rest of the continent), you be seeing
me complaining!

   Without a LAW, you have to watch the same dubbed version 3 or 4
   times before they broadcast a new series (i.e. the Simpsons are
   replayed for the 2nd or 3rd time now) or you have to wait 6 years
   or more before a TV series (like Star Trek Next Generation) is made
   available.

No need for a law here; Quebec owns a television network!  Why doesn't
Radio Quebec dub it?  Also, an English-language broadcaster is not
necessarily also a French-language broadcaster (although it happens to
be currently), as is the case with cinemas.

   Without law 101, we just don't trust the "market" alone as the mean
   to give to French its right place.  Without laws, in the various
   markets, we get nothing.

1) Quebec didn't try the market approach in the case of signage.
2) The film distributors are an oligopoly.  There are tens of
   thousands of stores in Quebec to choose from.
3) The movie regulations are a better example of "promotion of French"
   rather than "demotion of English" than Bills 101 and 178.



--
Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science		UUCP: 	     uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu"
Carnegie Mellon University		Phone: 	     +1 412 268 2145
5000 Forbes Avenue			Fax:	     +1 412 681 5739
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada