The FCC
- Thread starter Matthew s
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 17
- Views 2K
The FCC is the licensing authority for communications in the US. It could revoke the license if there were a good reason, such as a rules violation. In reality, it ain't gonna happen.
The FCC could revoke Echostar's license to operate due to not broadcasting content in the public interest as determined by congress. This is what was just passed last week in the Senate with regards to radio broadcasting. TV could receive the same treatment. However, in the case of Dish, I doubt they will face this revocation.
The DBS license for each slot is for 10 years. Dish has to renew the license every 10 years. They have to show they have been using the slot (not just sitting on it), providing service in the public interest (i.e. have subscribers), etc. It is a system where renewal by the same license holder is preferred, so Dish has to mess up to lose the license.
I wonder if he is referring to the current storm regarding the impending expiration of legislation the allows satellite to rebroadcast copyright material and its subsequent replacement legislation that could require big payments from satellite. There has been a lot of press coverage as Charlie himself testified before both the relevant House and Senate committees just last week. Cable and broadcasters are doing everything they can to hamper Dish and Direct. It will be interesting to see the legislation Congress ultimately passes.
I haven't heard anything about this. Could you provide more information on this legislation? I wasn't even aware of any such law, let alone it going to expire. That doesn't sound good.
Okay, let's set this up as a reset...DishSubLA said:
Local-into-local broadcasts are not expiring. The only part of the legislation that is expiring is the distant network and superstation provisions.
DISH CEO Ergen testified in Congress that he'd like to replace market-based local-into-local retransmission agreements with a royalty license. Of course, one of the problems is that with the expiration of the distant network and superstation provisions, the content and copyright owners are pushing for a huge increase in royalty license fees to continue those provisions.
Are you saying that soon the superstations will no longer be available as well as the distant nets?
Not big 4
Superstations aren't distant nets they are independents. They are not affiliated w/the big 4 nets.
Superstations aren't distant nets they are independents. They are not affiliated w/the big 4 nets.
I'll start by answering the original question in this post...
No, the FCC will not tell anyone they can no longer broadcast signals. They can if the licensee is found to no longer be serving the "public interest". That won't happen, here.
The authority for retransmissions of distant networks and superstations ends on 4 December 2009. That is when the law expires. So Congress is working on the new law to extend the license for distant networks and superstations. There has been a hearing to determine how to extend the law. This is the time for those in the industry to lobby for any and all changes. Hence, DISH CEO Ergen trying to get market-based retransmission consent for local channels revoked and putting a socialist-like compulsory license in its place.
Something will be passed to extend the law. It is just a matter of what the legislation will say.
No, the FCC will not tell anyone they can no longer broadcast signals. They can if the licensee is found to no longer be serving the "public interest". That won't happen, here.
The authority for retransmissions of distant networks and superstations ends on 4 December 2009. That is when the law expires. So Congress is working on the new law to extend the license for distant networks and superstations. There has been a hearing to determine how to extend the law. This is the time for those in the industry to lobby for any and all changes. Hence, DISH CEO Ergen trying to get market-based retransmission consent for local channels revoked and putting a socialist-like compulsory license in its place.
Something will be passed to extend the law. It is just a matter of what the legislation will say.
Actually I believe that is Dec 31, 2009. But you are othersise 100% correct. SHVERA amended the prior legislation in this area by saying
SEC. 201. EXTENSION OF RETRANSMISSION CONSENT EXEMPTION.
Section 325(b)(2)(C) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 325(b)(2)(C)) is amended by striking `December 31, 2004' and inserting `December 31, 2009'.
I am not trying to quibble (believe it ot not) but people are always anxious to kill off the supers by interpreting the language of the law. i just wanted to remove one more false (I believe) date from the discussion.
Last edited:
Yep. That's it. I forgot the date for termination was written into the bill. It was NOT an term expiration date from the time the bill was passed.
Similar threads
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Testing the Titanium C140 and C240 5G Filtered BLUE LNBFs- Latest: madmadworld
