Timeline Tight for Sat TV Legislation

[Chris Blount]

The timeline to get key satellite TV bills passed on Capitol Hill is getting tight, with only a few weeks left on the Congressional calendar to work on the must-pass legislation.

At the moment, Congress is on break for the July 4 holiday, and is set to return for business July 6.

So far, the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act (SHVERA) has been marked up in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Senate Judiciary Committee has marked up similar legislation. However, action on the bills still must be taken by the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Commerce Committee before they're prepared for a full vote on both the House and Senate floors.

The House Judiciary Committee may attempt to mark up SHERA next Wednesday, July 7, though nothing has been officially scheduled by the panel.

Observers said there are about 20 legislative working days left for Congress this year, given that a summer recess will take up the entire month of August and the 2004 election is around the corner. Satellite TV interests, including the Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association, are pushing to make sure critical legislation is passed during the tight schedule given that the industry's compulsory licenses expire Dec. 31.

http://www.skyreport.com (Used with permission)

[music_beans]

I believe that there should be no SHVIA at all. Its too confusing, and it might bring back PrimeTime 24!

[SimpleSimon]

What was wrong with PT24?

[dfergie]

Had Pt24 myself for awhile, liked it...

[bcope9]

It seems like when we had PT24 it was easier to get national network channels.

[waltinvt]

I believe that there should be no SHVIA at all. Its too confusing, and it might bring back PrimeTime 24!
Sounds like a good topic to discuss. What exactly happens if the SHVIA does not get renewed ? Does Satellite revert back to "old" regulations or does it become "un-regulated" ?

WaltinVt

[Mike123abc]

Sounds like a good topic to discuss. What exactly happens if the SHVIA does not get renewed ? Does Satellite revert back to "old" regulations or does it become "un-regulated" ?

WaltinVt

What happens is that all the local channels and superstations disappear. What this law did was say that the retransmission of local channels back to their DMAs was covered by the copyright agreements that allowed the local stations to broadcast over the air. It was a compulsary copyright, saying if you let a station broacast your material, satellite companies could rebroadcast it back to the DMA without paying you more money for your copyright.

[Greg Bimson]

I believe that there should be no SHVIA at all. Its too confusing, and it might bring back PrimeTime 24!Then the SHVIA is not the problem.

PrimeTime 24 was sued under the auspices of the SHVA, the SHVIA predecessor. PrimeTime 24 was found guilty of copyright infringement. As bcope9 points out, it was easier to get distant network services back then. It was so easy that it was against the law.

Don't go clamoring for the past, because the days of no qualification for network feeds are over. And, as Mike123abc points out, there needs to be some renewal of the SHVIA, or else all distant feeds and superstations disappear on 1 January, 2005.

[Geronimo]

I thought that SHVIA rewquired the satellite companies to negotiate retransmission consent from the local ststions unless the local station requested must carry status. Are you referring only to distant nets and supers Mike?

i am not sure which provisions of SHVIA expire. I am sure someone will tell us.

[waltinvt]

What happens is that all the local channels and superstations disappear. What this law did was say that the retransmission of local channels back to their DMAs was covered by the copyright agreements that allowed the local stations to broadcast over the air. It was a compulsary copyright, saying if you let a station broacast your material, satellite companies could rebroadcast it back to the DMA without paying you more money for your copyright.Well, I'm not a lawyer and certainly not a copywrite expert but it seems to me that judgments are based on an interpertation of a law. A court or body of authority renders decisions based on how they perceive a law and that perception is usually based on arguments presented by various parties.

Sometimes, when a new argument and evidence is presented, the interpertation of a particular law changes and may then be understood to mean something different than it did before.

I've never heard, and it makes no sense, that any "interpertation" of anything would ever be considered "temporary" and be required to be renewed periodicly. If new arguments or evidence is presented at some point, that's one thing but to say "this is how we're going to understand such and such", "but only until next year, then we're going to stop and go back to understanding it the old way again".

WaltinVt

[Mike123abc]

That is because a law is not a judgement. A judgement is produced by a court. If the court system had come up with a bazaar right to watch TV and said that restricting the retransmission of television signals was an unconstitutional violation of free speach then the need for congress to renew the law would not be needed.

Most of what congress passes now has expiration dates. This was introduced to keep the laws from getting outdated and forces items to be debated over again at a later date.

[Greg Bimson]

Ahem...

The law states that a compulsory license will be given for distant network and superstation licenses until 31 December, 2004. Once the date expires, the distant network and superstation programming goes away.

Unless, of course, Congress passes a new law, to either extend the date, or to make the compulsory license permanent.

[Geronimo]

Thanks Greg. That makes a little more sesnse than the statement that all local channels go away. Still I know that some aspects of SHVIA expire and some do not. I for one am not sure which things fall into each category.

[Greg Bimson]

The local channels have a permanent copyright license.

The reasoning behind having an expiration date on the distant network and superstation copyright exemptions is to discourage abuse. Since both DirecTV and Dish Network have been sued over this exact matter during the past decade, it appears to be in the NAB's interest to have the DBS companies go back to the well, er, Congress, to get extensions.

Don't forget that one of the provisions of one of the bills is to both provide significantly-viewed channels as well as shutdown distant network programming to those areas with local programming available on their DBS system.