Will Dish ever add Significantly viewed Channels

[Voyager6]

And although reconsideration of the SHVERA wouldn't need to take place until 8 December, 2009 (I think), it is only really needed for the distant networks (including signficantly-viewed) and the superstations. Local-into-local retransmissions do not expire.

I remember reading somewhere that the copyright office, which maintains some kind of control over the distant network process with respect to gathering fees, is actually proposing a free-market rate fee. If that is the case, then the entire issue becomes a bit more moot, as the price for distants would indeed go up.

So think about it. By December, 2009, with more and more digital (or HD) markets coming online, the SHVERA will only benefit those DirecTV subscribers without HD being rebroadcast, and Dish Network customers on superstations. It is assumed DirecTV will lose a lot of distant network customers on 20 February, 2009, when the analog cut-off occurs. The digital-only provisions of the SHVERA will then take effect, and a majority of the nation will not get anywhere near qualifying for the distant network feeds anymore as DirecTV will be rebroadcasting a local network in digital/HD.

Unless Dish Network is able to get something rewritten back into the law which will allow them to sell distant networks again, this legislation will simply extend the license to sell the superstation package.

Actually the Copyright Office is asking about this.

Federal Register: Section 109 Report to Congress

We also note that Section 119's unserved household limitation has given rise to significant litigation between Echostar and the broadcast television networks. The case began nearly nine years ago and arose out of claims that Echostar was delivering network station signals to subscribers who were not eligible to receive such stations under Section 119. In May 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the district court’s determination that Echostar had engaged in a “pattern or practice” of violating the unserved household limitation and found that, as a matter of law, it was required to issue a permanent injunction barring Echostar from delivering network station signals to any subscribers (served or unserved) pursuant to the Section 119 license. CBS v. Echostar, 450 F.3d 505 (11th Cir. 2006). The appellate court’s decision specifically directed the district court to issue the required injunction.
In August, 2006, after its efforts to appeal the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling were rejected (but before the district court had implemented the appellate court’s order), Echostar entered into a $100 million post–judgment settlement agreement with the affiliates of ABC, NBC, and CBS under which Echostar would, notwithstanding the appellate court’s decision, be permitted to continue to provide network station signals to legitimately “unserved” customers. However, Fox did not join in the settlement and filed a motion with the district court demanding that it reject the settlement and implement the injunction as directed by the Court of Appeals.
The district court agreed with Fox and rejected the post–judgment settlement. The court stated that it was bound by the Eleventh Circuit’s decision and lacked the discretion to alter that court’s clear mandate. The court emphasized the fact that, as the Eleventh Circuit found, Section 119 requires the issuance of a permanent nationwide injunction where it has been determined that a satellite carrier engaged in a “pattern or practice”of statutory violations. The court also rejected Echostar’s claim that the issuance of a permanent nationwide injunction preventing the delivery of distant affiliates of any of the Big Four networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox), even to households that could not receive over–the–air network station signals, would “work a manifest injustice on consumers.” According to the court, Congress made the determination in Section 119 that a permanent injunction is the appropriate remedy for the illegal acts committed by Echostar. The district court issued an order directing Echostar to cease all retransmissions of distant broadcast station signals affiliated with ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox, effective December 1, 2006. See CBS v. Echostar, __ F.Supp. 2d __, 2006 WL 4012199 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 20, 2006). We seek comment on the effect that the court’s injunction has had on Echostar and its subscribers. For example, how many subscribers has Echostar lost to a competing satellite carrier or to a local cable operator because it can no longer provide distant network station signals to its subscribers? Do any Echostar subscribers currently receive distant network station signals through a third party provider? Are subscribers disadvantaged because of the Echostar injunction or are there other options? We seek comment on other significant court cases, or pending litigation, that are relevant to our inquiry here.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Thanks, dmendenjr. I'm glad you posted a link to the Significantly Viewed list to shed additional light on this subject. Hopefully, this continues to make the distinction that Distant Nets and Significantly Viewed are two totally different issues.

Although they may be different issues, they are both integral pieces of the same section of law, along with the superstations. All three expire with the license given in 17 USC 119 on 8 December, 2009, unless Congress acts to extend the law again. That is generally a no-brainer, as the law has been extended four times since passage in 1988.

In order for significantly-viewed via satellite to continue on, there must be an extension of 17 USC 119.

Cable's rules are different, as they must serve channels within a given radius of the headend, and are not bound by the SHVERA.

 

[Peter Parker]

And although reconsideration of the SHVERA wouldn't need to take place until 8 December, 2009 (I think), it is only really needed for the distant networks (including signficantly-viewed) and the superstations. Local-into-local retransmissions do not expire.

I.

Thanks for making that point. People are confusing various sections of law and since my post was intended to calrify I should have mentioned this when I made the point about when SHVERA expires

 

[charlesrshell]

Thanks to all of you for trying to clear this up. It is all still above my head. I have the Super Stations package and don't even know if I need it. I will check with the wife to see if she views them any. I would like to have the Distant Locals come back. Nice to have a backup to the main channels, CBS, FOX, etc. Actually, I think it would be neat if you could pick the Distant Local channels. Would be nice for the military guys to watch their home town locals.

 

[Voyager6]

Thanks to all of you for trying to clear this up. It is all still above my head. I have the Super Stations package and don't even know if I need it. I will check with the wife to see if she views them any. I would like to have the Distant Locals come back. Nice to have a backup to the main channels, CBS, FOX, etc. Actually, I think it would be neat if you could pick the Distant Local channels. Would be nice for the military guys to watch their home town locals.

SHVERA is clear that if you can get locals you cannot get distants.

 

[Greg Bimson]

And although distant network service (distant locals) is different than signficantly-viewed (neighboring locals), they are both controlled by the same license. So for Dish Network to ever add signficantly-viewed, it requires and act of Congress and a signature of the bill into law by the President, since the injunction that prevents Dish Network from serving distant networks also prevents serving signficantly-viewed channels.