Greg, do you have a complete list, or a link to this information, of the O&Os for the big four?Greg Bimson said:
Court Orders Dish to Drop ALL Distant Networks
- Thread starter TNGTony
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 428
- Views 58K
This one is a bit confusing, so I'll take this one point at a time...waltinvt said:
Say you are CBS, Inc. You have this wonderful HD feed. You also own some affiliates across the United States, for which you have given exclusive first run rights for CBS programming.
So, Dish Network approaches you to give their customers access to your CBS HD feed. The problem is these are the only stations you own in your distribution model:
Los Angeles KCBS
San Francisco KPIX
Denver KCNC
Miami WFOR
Baltimore WJZ
Boston WBZ
Detroit WWJ
Minneapolis WCCO
New York WCBS
Philadelphia KYW
Pittsburgh KDKA
Austin KEYE
Dallas KTVT
Salt Lake City KUTV
Green Bay WFRV
Because CBS has given their affiliates first run rights, CBS can only offer Dish Network to give the HD feed to those customers only within a CBS-owned station's viewing area.
So, as CBS, you tell Dish Network to go ahead and uplink WCBS and KCBS in HD. Dish Network can already do this without CBS' permission, provided they only give the CBS feed to customers that do not get an analog CBS signal. The difference is that CBS says, "and we'll give you a blanket waiver per the terms from the SHVIA/SHVERA for all of our stations for only the HD feed".
The reason I believe it is a blanket waiver? Where I am, I can receive over-the-air both the DC and Baltimore CBS stations. So I don't get a distant CBS in analog. CBS owns the Baltimore CBS station, and I am in the Baltimore DMA, yet I cannot get the distant CBS HD feed. Why? Because I need a waiver from the DC CBS station. I don't need a waiver from the Baltimore station because CBS owns the station. Most likely, they've already given a blanket waiver for HD to Dish Network.
Remember, the issue here is that for analog CBS, I'd need to get waivers from both the DC and Baltimore CBS stations. However, for a distant CBS HD, I only need an HD waiver from the DC CBS station.
Keep in mind there are three separate licenses created by the government for copyright exemptions to deliver locals via satellite:
1) superstation license
2) local-into-local license
3) distant network license
There is another way to deliver a broadcast station without the government license, and that is by having the local station clear all programming. The program clearing method is what Tony believes is happening. However, that requires CBS to go back to syndicators and copyright holders for programming they don't own, like Entertainment Tonight and the NFL games. Neither will clear their programming nationwide. But by using the SHVA waiver process, CBS doesn't have to clear anything, but just provide a blanket waiver.
The big point here is if CBS did clear their programming, then I shouldn't be blacked out. CBS would have obtained a license and it would be moot that I'd need something from the DC CBS station.
No.waltinvt said:
The blanket waiver is the same waiver if you went to get them yourself. The only difference is that in this case, CBS has given the waiver to Dish Network for everyone within a CBS owned viewing area only. No need to ask, CBS has already provided it.
But that doesn't help when the DC CBS station, owned by Gannett, will not provide a waiver.
And let's not forget, there could still be a few blackout restrictions. Say you are receiving the distant CBS HD in Green Bay, and there is a NFL game at Green Bay. If the Green Bay game isn't sold out, there is a blackout put in place for the distant signal within 75 miles of the stadium.
No. Not unless CBS decides to remove the exclusive first run rights from their affiliates and then start to sell programming nationwide. Otherwise, to me, it appears that CBS is only using the SHVERA as the blanket waiver.waltinvt said:
I go back to my original example. If Dish Network received an injunction to stop delivering all local programming, what exactly happens? The courts injunct the local-into-local license, but any station under retransmission consent has a carriage contract. The carriage contracts for local-into-local refer to the local-into-local license, and since the license is used, all local-into-local programming is removed.
That is the issue I have with the CBS HD feed. It just looks like a blanket waiver contract for CBS owned stations. The blanket waiver is using the SHVA/SHVIA distant network license. Therefore, if the license is injuncted by the courts, the contract is voided, and the blanket waiver is no good.
It isn't that the brain isn't functioning, Walt. I am having a difficult time explaining that I believe just like the local-into-local carriage contracts use the government- provided license for local-into-local, I believe the CBS HD contract uses the government-provided license for distant networks, by simply issuing a waiver (the same waiver used to get analog locals).
Walt. I've had my say. The difference between Greg's explanation and the way I know CBS and Dish have things going is Greg thinks the distant HD CBS is being provided via waiver. Essentially, CBS granted everyone inside the grade B signal area of the affiliates they own. These waivers do not extend to others CBS affiliates. So if you are inside a grade B signal area of a station NOT owned by CBS, the you need a waiver from them as well. Greg explaind that really well.
The way I know CBS and Dish have things laid out is similar, except that instead of using the SHVREA as a copyright licesne and getting a waiver to go into grade B signal, CBS is granting Dish a rebroadcast license directly under the conditions of the SHVREA.
See ya
Tony
The way I know CBS and Dish have things laid out is similar, except that instead of using the SHVREA as a copyright licesne and getting a waiver to go into grade B signal, CBS is granting Dish a rebroadcast license directly under the conditions of the SHVREA.
See ya
Tony
Folks all I know is that this thread started on May 24 and here it is June 21 and nothing has changed. Greg is doing alot of speculating, but the bottom line is he does'nt know whats going to happen any more than you or I. Mayby the courts will say that any customer more than 35 miles from a transmitting tower will get free HD waivers or mayby they will tell Dish to turn them all off. I don't know and neither does Greg. Well gotta go watch CBS HD news form NY , seeya
Greg Bimson said:
No. It's not. The end result is the same, but the process This is where much of the confusion comes in. Here is as simply as I can put it.
Option 1) Goverment is granting a copyright license under SHVREA (Whether CBS likes it or not. Part two...CBS is waives exclusivity (not granting a copyright license) allowing Dish to carry the program.
Option 2) CBS Says, We are granting you copyright clerance. This program can also be shown in our exclusive areas and other areas where allowed by Federal law.
Again, the end result is the same except when the court order is put into place. Option 2 is NOT affected by this court decision. Option 1 is.
see ya
Tony
And here is my issue...TNGTony said:
Tell me how CBS got the NFL to give clearance, when Sunday Ticket is the only way to see out-of-market NFL games. I can guarantee you the NFL did not give CBS the ability to resell NFL football in HD with clearance.
Wrong. The appeals court threw the case back to the district court. There is no way the courts will say "any customer more than 35 miles from a transmitting tower will get free HD waivers". The courts cannot make that decision.uhlesses said:
As of right now, Dish Network has appealed to the same court that remanded the case back to the district court to enforce an injunction. Unless the entire 11th Circuit Court decides to rehear the case, the distant networks in analog will be gone. I also believe it applies to the HD feed of CBS, because there is no way the NFL granted CBS the ability to sell HD feeds of their games to Dish Network.
Can they do that? After all, don't WCBS and KCBS have some sindicated programming that they don't own, like Dr. Phil. CBS does not have the authority or rights to grant Dish Network the retransmisions rights to it, when another station already has purchased the rights in the area, for example KRON in San Francisco.TNGTony said:
If that was the authority they used, then lots of non-CBS programming is subject to syndex blackouts.
Derwin0 said:
Why would any station care that their syndicated program was being seen beyond their DMA? In fact they probably love it.
It has no comparison to say NFL blackouts which were created so individule teams could insure they sold all their tickets before it could be broadcast within their area.
In any case, I believe CBS DOES have the right to grant Dish (or anyone) retran rights to any program it broadcasts within any constraints it may have agreed to by contract with affiliates and producers (such as the NFL).
I expect that probably CBS basically agreed that they wouldn't grant retrans rights into grade B or better to keep affiliates happy and that they'd honor certain blackout restrictions to keep the NFL happy. Other than that, I believe the national network "owns" (or at least co-owns) all copywrite to anything that leaves their studio and can do whatever the hell they want with it.
Greg Bimson said:
Why would they have to "give" any rights to their "owned" affiliates? As for the ones they don't own but contract with, doesn't that depend on what the contract says and is therefore subject to negoiation?
I've never seen one of these contracts and don't know how often they're renewed but I suspect they change as conditions warrant and it would make sense, that since the parent network ultimatly wants as many viewers as possible, they'd have some kind of contingency in the contract restricting those "exclusive first run rights" to areas within an affiliate's dma that are "predicted" to receive the OTA signal.
Greg Bimson said:
Again I say but what if CBS's contracts with non-owned affiliates "exempts" "first run rights" in predicted "white areas"? In other words, the affiliate only has rights to the viewers they can get a decent signal to.
Greg Bimson said:
Again, I bring up contracts - what if programming is sort of "pre-cleared" under certain conditions by virtue of how the contracts are written? The same could apply to contracts with producers.
Actually I would think progran owners would be in favor of this as it gets their programs out to viewers that may otherwise not see them or in the case of HD, it insures more will see the program with the quality that was intended.
Greg Bimson said:
I thought it was only the "distants" license that was injuncted?
I'm still not clear on if or how much this court ruling affects "digital" broadcasts and by extension, any HD DNS Dish may have or will have? I mean, digital wasn't even an issue when this court case started - right?
In any case, say hypathetically that the HD (digital) feeds ARE exempt from this court ruling and say Dish manages to get contracts with the other networks (well all but Fox, which is another story anyway) and these contracts allow retrans of the HD feed into O&O AND "white areas", this would basically get Dish off the hook, assuming they get the remaining SD LiLs up plus the lion's share of their HD LiLs up as they plan to. Of course once they get HD LiLs up everywhere, the whole issue of distants is gone anyway.
But the syndicators wouldn't.waltinvt said:
Syndicators make their money by receiving dollars for their programming by granting exclusivity to ONE local station. Either:
The syndicators, such as Dr. Phil, have given CBS the right to rebroadcast Dr. Phil to an almost national audience (which would disrespect other stations, such as KRON in San Francisco), or;
The syndicators have no say, because CBS is using the distant license provided by the SHVIA/SHVERA.
CBS doesn't own rights to the syndicated and the NFL programming. That is what needs to be cleared, and I fully suspect neither the syndicators nor the NFL will clear their programming for CBS to redistribute.waltinvt said:
Is it because you are located within the 75-mile blackout radius, or is it because either CBS HD feed is showing a different game than the one you'd get locally?n0qcu said:
Fine. However, the reason for the distant network license's existance in the SHVA/SHVIA/SHVERA is because the station picked up as a distant (in this case WCBS's and KCBS's HD feed) most likely cannot clear their copyrights.waltinvt said:
Best example: it's 1993, and there is no small dish. However, there are BUD's, and anyone could start a company delivering distant networks, as there was the SHVA law passed in 1988. There isn't enough space on satellite to deliver all locals, so the idea behind the law was to deliver networks to the unserved. There were only two real issues:
1) The distant network could not be delivered to a customer within a predicted Grade B coverage, and;
2) No contract was needed for this copyright exemption.
The local station could give a legal document to a viewer in order to give the viewer a distant station. This is the waiver.
To me, it makes much more sense that CBS gave Dish Network a waiver, for all people in a CBS O&O-only viewing area, than it would for CBS to be clearing copyrights after all of these years. The waiver process is much simpler than clearing all copyrights for the syndicated shows and the non-network copyrighted programming like the NFL.
Regarding NFL blackouts on CBSHD, JohnH has reported seeing blackouts on CBSHD East. He is located in the Phila. PA DMA, a CBS O&O market. On the other hand, I live in the Wilkes Barre, PA DMA (I have a waiver) and have never seen an NFL blackout on CBSHD. There seems to illustrate the point being discussed.
Greg Bimson said:
Don't syndicators deal (contract) with individule affiliates rather than the national network? So wouldn't the only syndications affected be whatever are on the stations used for the distant feeds?
And again, wouldn't it be likely that the network, when they contract with the owners of these programs (new or syndicated), be able to have stipulations that might govern retransmission rights to potential carriers (like satellite) such that distribution would be allowed into "white areas".
My point is, almost anything and everything can be contracted as long as the wording bears legal scrutney and both parties agree to it. So while certain parties have a vested interest in protecting their exclusivility (I think I just made that word up
), other parties have a vested interest in insuring as many eyes see their product as possible. Things have changed a lot since the first SHVIA and with new technology, the options are much greater. I would be surprised if the contracts of today wern't much different than the ones signed even 5 years ago.Usually the syndicators sell by station group. KRON has Dr. Phil because Granite signed on before the CBS O&O's.waltinvt said:
Not likely at all. If the networks had done this for white areas, the distant network provision in the SHVA would not be needed.waltinvt said:
I'd say contracts nowadays restrict copyrights more when it comes to redistributing content than even 5 years ago.waltinvt said:
Greg Bimson said:
I live in a non O&O CBS area but I can not get any CBS OTA but my neighbor, 500 yards further up the hill can get the analog CBS OTA out of Burlington. I have always received the CBS-HD feed out of NY from Dish but NOT the distant analog feed.
Maybe I'm one of the reasons Dish got sued
or maybe WCAX gave Dish an HD only waiver on my behalf OR..... maybe CBS gave Dish blanket permission to retran to me (and anyone else) because the L-R prediction model shows my address as "unserved" by analog and they can do that because all their contacts (with Dish, affiliates and everyone else) are written such that all parties agreed they can do that.....but clearly only in "white areas".SHVERA law doesn't enter into it, other than maybe some of the same qualification proceedures being referenced and even those could be totally obsolete for digital soon if congress takes the FCC's recommendations and issues clearer rules for digital (HD).
I'm guessing this might already be the case with CBS or if not, soon could be with them and the other nets.
If done right, it's win-win for all except those affiliates that have been dragging their feet with digital but still want rights to viewers that can't "view" them. They then might have to "beg" satellite to take their digital feed for HD LiLs instead of trying to negoiate for the moon to "allow" Dish to carry it. I don't know....it makes sense to me.....but then a lot of weird stuff does
Greg Bimson said:
Exactly! and it actually gives the network back some of the control that SHVA took away in exchange for putting more fairness into signal distribution which SHVA tried to do but was flawed because of the corruption of some in congress and the NAB.
Greg Bimson said:
How so and why? The bottom line is the reason for copywrite is so the owners of the product will be allowed to fairly distribure it for sale and it won't be stolen by others. They want their product to be sold to as many customers as are willing to pay for it. The affiliates want to be paid for retailing that product to some customers without actually providing the product. It makes sense to come up with a way to make that happen (get the product to the customer) - especially when there are millions of customers willing to pay for the product but not being allowed to receive it under the current system.
