Court Orders Dish to Drop ALL Distant Networks

[waltinvt]

No. The reason is that CBS and Dish Network have a contract that allows Dish to sell the CBS HD channel in areas where there are O&O affiliates and in areas where there is no other CBS affiliates available.

Every other network could do this tomorrow if they wished.

This ruling concerns distant networks that DO NOT wish to be sold outside their area. This is the point most people miss when complaining about the law. The law is a permissive law, not a restrictive law. Without the SHVA and its successors no one anywhere could get distant networks unless the networks themselves allowed it.

See ya
Tony

and I think Dish is activly working on just that. Before Marc Lumpkin left Dish a few months back (maybe 4 or more - can't remember), he told me that Dish was "very" close to have a deal with ABC for an HD feed and that they were still negoiating with Fox & NBC.

Now if Dish does work a deal with any / all of the other national networks, similar to their deal with CBS, then they could launch HD DNS (within the constraints of their respective contracts of course) anytime regardless of the court ruling or the FCC - right?

 

[riffjim4069]

The Dish Network Triple Play....

...no it's not a discounted voice, data, and video package, rather, it's view VOOM-Lite, pay Tivo royalties, and have your Distant Networks stripped away.

I wonder if they'll be Dish'n Up a Home Run?

 

[TNGTony]

Now if Dish does work a deal with any / all of the other national networks, similar to their deal with CBS, then they could launch HD DNS (within the constraints of their respective contracts of course) anytime regardless of the court ruling or the FCC - right?

Correct. The court ruling deals with the SHVREA only. Cotracts with the networks are not impacted by anything in this law.

Dish Network currently has national distribution deals with the following TV networks:
Univision
Telemundo
Telefutura
TBN
Daystar
Pax/ "i"
Azteca America
CBS (HD Only)

See ya
Tony

 

[waltinvt]

Correct. The court ruling deals with the SHVREA only. Cotracts with the networks are not impacted by anything in this law.

Dish Network currently has national distribution deals with the following TV networks:
Univision
Telemundo
Telefutura
TBN
Daystar
Pax/ "i"
Azteca America
CBS (HD Only)

See ya
Tony

Don't know if this means anything but something Scott mentioned in his Summit report today was interresting:

"(oh and I didnt mention in the opening video they showed with all the HD channels there was a logo there for NBC HD, not sure what that means)"

 

[Greg Bimson]

Now if Dish does work a deal with any / all of the other national networks, similar to their deal with CBS, then they could launch HD DNS (within the constraints of their respective contracts of course) anytime regardless of the court ruling or the FCC - right?

That depends.

Unlike Tony, who believes the contract between Dish Network and CBS is a straight carriage contract, I believe it is based upon the copyright exemption granted in the "Distant Network" provision in the SHVA law. Under this theory, if Dish Network is injucted from using the copyright exemption and that copyright exemption is in the contract between CBS and Dish Network, then the CBS HD feed will be cut-off. Here is why, straight from the Dish Network website:

You must not be in range to receive the signals of a CBS affiliate from a nearby city. For instance many people in Baltimore (an O&O station market) are in range of the Washington DC CBS affiliate. These Baltimore residents cannot receive the HD feed without a waiver from the Washington DC CBS affiliate. The logic behind this is that the owners of the affiliate station do not wish to lose viewers to the New York or LA CBS station, generally a loss of viewers leads to a loss of ad revenue for the station.

Therefore, it appears the contract between Dish Network and CBS is a blanket waiver for HD using the SHVA/SHVIA as the terms and conditions, since no waiver is required for the O&O's but a waiver is required for the non-O&O affiliates. If this is the case, and I believe it is, the CBS HD feed will be gone. However, I said it is only my opinion

 

[riffjim4069]

Perhaps I too am wrong, but I came to the same conclusion as Greg.

 

[TNGTony]

The contract is based on the copyright exemption, but it is a carriage contract. This means that it uses the language of the SHVREA/SHVA to determine eligibility, but the authorization for carriage is based on a contract.

See ya
Tony

 

[waltinvt]

That depends.

Unlike Tony, who believes the contract between Dish Network and CBS is a straight carriage contract, I believe it is based upon the copyright exemption granted in the "Distant Network" provision in the SHVA law. Under this theory, if Dish Network is injucted from using the copyright exemption and that copyright exemption is in the contract between CBS and Dish Network, then the CBS HD feed will be cut-off. Here is why, straight from the Dish Network website:Therefore, it appears the contract between Dish Network and CBS is a blanket waiver for HD using the SHVA/SHVIA as the terms and conditions, since no waiver is required for the O&O's but a waiver is required for the non-O&O affiliates. If this is the case, and I believe it is, the CBS HD feed will be gone. However, I said it is only my opinion

Gone for "white areas" but not necessarly O&O - right?

 

[waltinvt]

The contract is based on the copyright exemption, but it is a carriage contract. This means that it uses the language of the SHVREA/SHVA to determine eligibility, but the authorization for carriage is based on a contract.

See ya
Tony

aaaaaaaaaaand in this corner LoL. You and Greg both make sense but it sounds like it really boils down to what the exact wording in the contract is, which I expect none of us are privy to.

 

[TNGTony]

I know that in forums like this no one can state that the sky is blue without some one else saying, it isn't. But it does not change the fact that the CBS HD contract is very simple, but it is a contract and not an SHVREA qualification. Why do I know this? Because the SHVREA DOES NOT APPLY TO DT CHANNELS...PERIOD! The SHVREA specifically mentions that the qualifications for distant Digital channels need to be reviewed by the FCC and the FCC needs to set up regulations by (I think 2008).

But I know that now some one else will argue that.

See ya
Tony

 

[minnow]

Any guesses when out distant's will be cut off ??

 

[chaddux]

I know that in forums like this no one can state that the sky is blue without some one else saying, it isn't. But it does not change the fact that the CBS HD contract is very simple, but it is a contract and not an SHVREA qualification. Why do I know this? Because the SHVREA DOES NOT APPLY TO DT CHANNELS...PERIOD! The SHVREA specifically mentions that the qualifications for distant Digital channels need to be reviewed by the FCC and the FCC needs to set up regulations by (I think 2008).

But I know that now some one else will argue that.

See ya
Tony

Hey Tony, isn't it "SHVERA" or is there another new law? You've been calling it SHVREA for a while and I know all of the acronyms are pretty similar so I don't know if there is new legislation that I missed.

 

[cablewithaview]

Sky blue ???? I thought it was purple ????

 

[TNGTony]

Chad, SHVA is the original that allowed for legal distribution of network channels even over the objections of the networks themselves.

SHVIA allowed for local into local by satellite vendors and narrowed the conditions under which distant networks are allowed against the will of the network being distributed.

The SHVREA (the latest) Pretty much left the conditions under which distant SD networks are available against the will of the network being distributed with the major exception that if your locals were available via satellite no matter what the signal level you no longer automatically qualify for distants. It also specifically allowed for digital local into local which was only implied before. At the same time it charged the FCC with setting up rules for digital must carry and distant network qualifications.

The current rules for distant networks are for SD only.

See ya
Tony

 

[JP Threw]

Wish this was a sticky!!!!!

 

[minnow]

Yeah, I made the same request several pages back. Guess this topic doesn't impact the mod's like it will those of us out in the boonies, so it's not important to them.

 

[waltinvt]

I know that in forums like this no one can state that the sky is blue without some one else saying, it isn't.

Yea, well it's been pretty darn grey in New England lately.

But it does not change the fact that the CBS HD contract is very simple, but it is a contract and not an SHVREA qualification. Why do I know this? Because the SHVREA DOES NOT APPLY TO DT CHANNELS...PERIOD! The SHVREA specifically mentions that the qualifications for distant Digital channels need to be reviewed by the FCC and the FCC needs to set up regulations by (I think 2008).

But I know that now some one else will argue that.

See ya
Tony

I hear you there.
The plain and simple fact that many don't understand is: truth is objective - never subjective. It doesn't matter if 99.99% think that an error is not an error, if it is an error, it is because it "is" and doesn't change because of anyone's opinion. A classic example is when 99% of the population thought the world was flat but that did not change the fact (truth) that it was round.

Much of today's society has fallen into a quagmire of "relative" thinking and because of that, lost a lot of natural wisdom and everyday common sense.

Of course then there's those that swear to evolution even when there's never been any fossil evidence to back it up

Anyway, the "objective" truth of the CBS-HD deal with Dish is what it is and whether you or Greg is right on this one may never be know, as courts are certainly subject to error.

 

[Greg Bimson]

But it does not change the fact that the CBS HD contract is very simple, but it is a contract and not an SHVREA qualification. Why do I know this? Because the SHVREA DOES NOT APPLY TO DT CHANNELS...PERIOD! The SHVREA specifically mentions that the qualifications for distant Digital channels need to be reviewed by the FCC and the FCC needs to set up regulations by (I think 2008).

But I know that now some one else will argue that.

Of course.

So, if the CBS HD contract is this:

CBS hereby authorized Dish Network to rebroadcast the CBS HD feed into all areas where:
1) there is no analog coverage by a CBS affiliate, or;
[this wouldn't need to be in the contract, as the law allows the HD feed to be resold to those in analog white areas]
2) there is only analog coverage by a CBS affiliate that is owned or operated by CBS, Inc, by use of a blanket waiver of the SHVA.

Yes, I am paraphrasing it a bit. But, just so there is no confusion:

The contract is based on the copyright exemption, but it is a carriage contract.

So, if the sole reason for carriage is the ability to use the copyright exemption license granted by the law, and the license is used in the contract (blanket waiver), and an injunction is issued to stop use of the copyright license, then the contract expires, because the copyright exemption cannot be used.

For example, if Dish Network was injuncted from using the local-into-local license, every station would be removed, even thought there are contracts. Since all stations (excluding possibly Daystar and PAX) use the local-into-local copyright exemption of the SHVIA, and all carriage contracts point to that exemption, the local channels would still be removed if the injunction for local-into-local was issued. The contract doesn't matter without the license.

Like I said, my opinion. But I'll stick to it.

 

[waltinvt]

Just a bit OT but I want to point out that the way Tony and Greg are debating here is a great example of how it should be done. Many of us (including me) could learn from this example.

And even in the "Pit", one of them exibits the same class. The other would too I'm sure but I havn't seen him there yet. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Keep it coming guys - it's interresting as hell.

 

[BigFella]

Greg - I'll be up front here and tell you I'm hoping you're wrong and Tony's correct ... From E*'s point of view, why would they announce (although not officially to the public) a similar deal with NBC-HD that they have with CBS-HD? I've got to believe that the CBS and NBC deals (and the alleged negotiations with FOX and ABC) are what they consider to be workarounds to the injunction. Why else would they be putting time and money into the effort?