Its not like dish used to sell pirated descramblers for the big c-band dishes...we all know they would never ever do something like that
Locast update
- Thread starter mwdxer1
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 150
- Views 20K
Isn't the head of Locast run by an ex FCC attorney or someone that knows the broadcasting laws well? Seems I read that somewhere.
The FCC has nothing to do with it, this is a copyright case that is being heard in federal court. And prior cases don't have an impact on current cases, only the actual facts on the ground in this case.
Locast is being represented, at least in part, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They have a little experience in this area | Electronic Frontier Foundation
I never said they did. I simply remarked on previous Dish executives being involved. What makes you such an expert? Are you a corporate attorney?
Well, no, I can read and I have graduated a high school that required me to pass civics class. The case has been filed in federal court, and the FCC does not adjudicate copyright complaints. Locast is not subject to FCC regulations in any form that I'm aware of. If I'm wrong, I'll be glad to accept it when shown evidence
OK dude. You're inventing things I never said. Former Dish executives have been involved in litigation against that company and some of those people are involved with Locast. That's where the "guilty by association" comment came from. If that's too difficult for you to comprehend, then I have nothing additional to say.
"Locast founder and chairman David Goodfriend has a passion for finding ways to help disenfranchised consumers. A former FCC, congressional, and White House lawyer, and an adjunct professor of law, Goodfriend is no stranger to the intersection of media, law, and technology."
About Locast - Locast
www.locast.org
I think the judge should also look at the original contract for the tv station and the broadcasting of the station in his decision on locast. The original contract the way I understood it growing up was if the broadcasters wanted the free use of the spectrum they had to let the people watch their station free of charge cause the spectrum belonged to the people not the government and it was only on loan to them. If they stopped broadcasting they had to return the spectrum to the government/fcc to repurpose it. Now when comes to Locast they are just letting the people that have trouble getting the stations in their own area a way to watch that station free of charge. Now if the station Fox,ABC,CBS,NBC are complaining and sueing to me they are not living up to the broadcaster side of the agreement and they should have to let locast rebroadcast their signal free of charge or have to give their spectrum back to the people and take their channels the cable digital way so they don't have to use the peoples spectrum. And they can stop Locast from rebroadcasting their signal.
P.S.
I also think that some broadcasters,telcos,cables and fcc plus one satellite company,Some of the people should go to jail for buying and selling something they didn't own. (The spectrum) It Bullsh!t the broadcasters,some that went out of the business and a satellite company not even owned by an american made billions on something not theirs didn't go to jail for buying and selling it.Also the fcc members that let the buy and sell go through.
P.P.S
No I don't live in a locast area,hell might never see locast in this area in WV. To rural and only pick up CBS,NBC and PBS,3 broadcast stations over the air.
P.S.
I also think that some broadcasters,telcos,cables and fcc plus one satellite company,Some of the people should go to jail for buying and selling something they didn't own. (The spectrum) It Bullsh!t the broadcasters,some that went out of the business and a satellite company not even owned by an american made billions on something not theirs didn't go to jail for buying and selling it.Also the fcc members that let the buy and sell go through.
P.P.S
No I don't live in a locast area,hell might never see locast in this area in WV. To rural and only pick up CBS,NBC and PBS,3 broadcast stations over the air.
One fly in your "ointment" is that the local stations aren't the ones suing Locast, it's the networks that supply programming to the locals. Yes, some locals are owned by the networks, but that's not the contention of the lawsuit.
I don't see that Locast & the FCC is not an issue, as Locast does no transmitting over the air waves. It would be a copyright issue, if anything. I am sure this will go to the U.S. Supreme Court, if either side loses. I think this will drag on for sometime. Both sides are in this fight to the end. Both have a lot to lose.
There are other services that stream LPTVs and diginets. They stay away from the Big networks. Probably for that reason.
But you see,yes I know that it is not the local stations that are sueing its the big networks.But even the big networks need the revenue from the local stations and the ads they sell.Yes they already shown they can make money off of cable with peacock,cbsaccess,etc.But most of their money comes from selling their service to the local broadcast stations. If they had to make it on the revenues of their O&O stations alone and their digital they would have a hard time makeing it. Like I said. If they don't want people to watch their streams then anywhere the local station is useing their service block them and only use the spectrum for the local O&O station. If going to sell your service to that local station then you are offering that signal to anybody in that area within like a 100 miles so if can't be see because of obsticles and other stuff as long as a company is not charging for the service it should be allowed.That is the offer that was promise to the people.See how long the networks would last.ABC,CBS,FOX,NBC,CW if didn't have the local stations to fall back on and only had their O&O stations for income.And even the O&O stations are suppose to make it possible for everybody in their viewing area to be able to see their signal. So should be anywhere you let your signal be shown,anybody within like 100 miles from that broadcast station as long as not being charged should be free no matter how it is provided.
Local stations lose no ad revenue due Locast's retransmissions. A case can even be made that they increase ad revenue by expanding the viewership of the stations.
Its not the local stations...its the content providers objecting to redistribution of their intellectual property without compensation
They lose nothing... Locast receives their free transmissions over the air and rebroadcasts them like any other non-profit repeater.
In some cases, this might be true.
However, often Copyright owners generally get paid based on a contracted rate per show, regardless of the number of households that pay for access to the channel the show appears on. The channel owners get revenue based on the number of subscribers + local ad revenue + ancillary lines of business. The networks get revenue from channel owners (for some reason I still don't understand) + national ad revenue + ancillary lines of business that can include content production which makes them Copyright owners in some cases.
In the cases where the network owns the local station and produces the show, the ad rates are based on projected total measured viewership and not subscribed viewership, and there are performance clauses if viewership increases or decreases. With subscriber fees, there is not a direct correlation between how many people subscribe to a channel and what the network pays for content. Viewership still is the key metric when rates are renegotiated upon a show's renewal.
There are exceptions to this, like anything of course.
They lose the retransmission fees that would've been paid by any Locast subscribers that would've bought cable or satellite TV service had Locast not been available. That is the entire argument of the broadcasters suing Locast
Similar threads
