SHVERA + CW = End of Superstations?

[kucharsk]

I've heard that the CW stations want to be treated as a network under the terms of SHVERA, while WB and UPN didn't care.

If that's true, that likely means the end of the superstation package for anyone who doesn't qualify for distant network service.

Has anyone heard anything along these lines, or have they seen KTLA or WSBK go away for them?

[James Long]

None of the superstations have been affected yet. It does look like CW distants are coming.

[Greg Bimson]

And as another argument has pointed out, the five superstations will remain as superstations. Being affiliates of the CW does not change their status as superstations.

[James Long]

Curiosity ... if one of them joined the NBC network would they loose their superstation status?

[chaddux]

Curiosity ... if one of them joined the NBC network would they loose their superstation status?

No. They might lose it though.

[James Long]

If joining NBC would cause a station to lose their status, why wouldn't joining CW?

Both are over the threshold definition of "Television Network" --- beyond that, size shouldn't matter.

[joblo]

The superstation definition makes specific reference to networks that existed in 1995. That means ABC/CBS/FOX/NBC, forever and always, or until the law is changed.

[TNGTony]

Check superstation availability again. Looks like all the CW supers are no longer available to new subscribers! I checked many different addresses in many different DMAs. Only WSBK remains available in most of the country.

However if you check station availability in the individual station web pages, they all still show they are part of the superstations package.

See ya
Tony

[Geronimo]

People are always killing the superstations. I don't know how many times that I have read definitive and authoritarian statements that they will be gone on this date or that.

I will belive that they are gone when I see it.

[joblo]

Indeed, I can no longer find any zip codes where CW supers are available, not even places like Hawaii that have neither a local CW nor CW-E/W channel.

But as I said in the WWOR thread, it's possible this is a software glitch and nothing more.

Otoh, supers are, and have been for a long time, subject to syndex and network-non-dup protection, so it's possible E* has decided it isn't worth the hassle anymore.

I would allow a few weeks for the dust to settle from the new network launches before jumping to conclusions, however.

(I note also that WSBK is still listed as a UPN station, even though that network is defunct, and still not available in areas where I remember it being unavailable before.)

[chaddux]

I logged into my account and I can't even add WSBK. I can qualify my address for WSBK but there's no option to add it.

[James Long]

The superstation definition makes specific reference to networks that existed in 1995. That means ABC/CBS/FOX/NBC, forever and always, or until the law is changed.

17 USC 119 (d) Definitions -
(2) Network station. -
The term ''network station'' means -
(A) a television station licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, including any translator station or terrestrial satellite station that rebroadcasts all or substantially all of the programming broadcast by a network station, that is owned or operated by, or affiliated with, one or more of the television networks in the United States which offer an interconnected program service on a regular basis for 15 or more hours per week to at least 25 of its affiliated television licensees in 10 or more States; or

(B) a noncommercial educational broadcast station (as defined in section 397 of the Communications Act of 1934); except that the term does not include the signal of the Alaska Rural Communications Service, or any successor entity to that service.

Old definition
(9) Superstation. -
The term ''superstation'' -
(A) means a television broadcast station, other than a network station, licensed by the Federal Communications Commission that is secondarily transmitted by a satellite carrier; and

(B) except for purposes of computing the royalty fee, includes the Public Broadcasting Service satellite feed.

As of December 2004
(9) Superstation.—
The term ‘superstation’ means a television station, other than a network station, licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, that is secondarily transmitted by a satellite carrier.The specific networks are NOT named in 17 USC 119.

The absence of Superstations from the locals availability system is odd. Something is up. One thing for sure, despite any argument over whether or not the stations remain superstations, those stations are 100% optional carriage. E* is NOT required to provide them to customers.

[rnbmusicfan]

Curiosity ... if one of them joined the NBC network would they loose their superstation status?

I heard KTVT (CBS) Dallas was originally a superstation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTVT

When it became a CBS affiliate, it lost C-Band distribution. It was never mentioned [included on the FCC list] as a superstation afterwards. Note: The FCC considers TBS a cable channel now; WGN which has a cable feed, still was on that list however.

[kucharsk]

The absence of Superstations from the locals availability system is odd. Something is up. One thing for sure, despite any argument over whether or not the stations remain superstations, those stations are 100% optional carriage. E* is NOT required to provide them to customers.Exactly.

The point is this - the "superstations" on the list were in fact "superstations" in the way TBS and WGN are superstations prior to the creation of the WB and UPN networks ten years ago.

WB and UPN were desperate for viewers, so they both decided at the time that their stations would continue to be treated as independents and as such didn't decide to apply the protections contained in the SHVERA to their stations.

Now with the CW, I've read those stations HAVE chosen to ask for the SHVERA protections to apply to their stations, which is why Echostar now has CW network distant local stations in the guide, just as they do for the "major" networks.

On the other hand, MyNetwork TV has chosen to once again forego SHVERA protection, which may be why WSBK is still listed, as most WB stations became CW stations, and most UPN stations became MyNetwork TV stations.

Now, the question is whether the stations involved will want Echostar to actively enforce SHVERA against the CW stations. In many markets they may, but Tribune may not care if your local CW station and the remote CW stations are all Tribune stations (so in LA you could watch Denver's KWGN, and in Denver you could watch KTLA.)

Or at least I'm hoping that's the way it turns out, as I've been faithfully watching the KTLA Morning News every weekday since 1992, even though I live in Colorado, and I really don't want to have to give that up now... :confused:

[rnbmusicfan]

Exactly.

The point is this - the "superstations" on the list were in fact "superstations" in the way TBS and WGN are superstations prior to the creation of the WB and UPN networks ten years ago.

WB and UPN were desperate for viewers, so they both decided at the time that their stations would continue to be treated as independents and as such didn't decide to apply the protections contained in the SHVERA to their stations.

Now with the CW, I've read those stations HAVE chosen to ask for the SHVERA protections to apply to their stations, which is why Echostar now has CW network distant local stations in the guide, just as they do for the "major" networks.

On the other hand, MyNetwork TV has chosen to once again forego SHVERA protection, which may be why WSBK is still listed, as most WB stations became CW stations, and most UPN stations became MyNetwork TV stations.

Now, the question is whether the stations involved will want Echostar to actively enforce SHVERA against the CW stations. In many markets they may, but Tribune may not care if your local CW station and the remote CW stations are all Tribune stations (so in LA you could watch Denver's KWGN, and in Denver you could watch KTLA.)

Or at least I'm hoping that's the way it turns out, as I've been faithfully watching the KTLA Morning News every weekday since 1992, even though I live in Colorado, and I really don't want to have to give that up now... :confused:

MyNetwork isn't really a network. It isn't even 15 hours of content to be a network. [side note: MyNetwork more likely will fail]. For stations running it - exclusivity protection would probably fall under syndex and network non duplication rules, but the stations directly (not the parent network) would have to be involved in asserting their protection. WSBK isn't a CW or MyNetwork affiliate either.

Indeed for the former WB now CW stations, Tribune may not care for their markets - in the scenario you presented. They didn't care back when the stations ran WB, in permitting Echostar to offer those stations to existing customers, without blackouts.

[TNGTony]

On the other hand, MyNetwork TV has chosen to once again forego SHVERA protection, which may be why WSBK

WSBK is the only "superstation" that is NOT a CW or MyTV affiliate. It is the only independent unit. OTOH WWOR is a My Network TV affiliate and is no longer listed as available as a superstation anywhere.

WSBK which is INDEEPENDENT is the only station still listed as available as a superstation in Dish's web site

See ya
Tony

[joblo]

First: they’re baaaaack -- at least for now. All 5 of ‘em, numerous zips.

Second: James, you’re quoting the wrong definition. What everybody commonly considers the supers are not really what the law defines as “superstations”, but rather a limited set of stations that is in some places referred to as the “nationally distributed superstations” (NDS), and in other places simply defined according to the same criteria as NDS. See, for instance, the RC provisions in 47USC325, wherein NDS are exempt, and also the infringement provisions for network stations in 17USC119 (under which the DNS injunction is sought), wherein NDS are likewise exempt.

[derwin0]

Check superstation availability again. Looks like all the CW supers are no longer available to new subscribers! I checked many different addresses in many different DMAs. Only WSBK remains available in most of the country.
The address broker shows that all 5 superstations are available in York, PA.
SUPERSTATIONS
Congratulations! This address is eligible for all Superstations.
Superstations - $5.99 per month
Station Affiliate Dish Channel Number
DENVER KWGN WB 235
LOS ANGELES KTLA WB 232
NEW YORK WPIX WB 234
BOSTON WSBK UPN 8775
NEW YORK WWOR UPN 238

[Ohioankev]

The address broker shows that all 5 superstations are available in York, PA.

Plain and simple, if we lose ABC/FOX/CBS/THE CW Network... and DVR AT&T can come and pick up thier oversized worthless paperweight of a reciever. WWE Smackdown was the reason I switched to DISH Network, along with superior DVR compared to the cable company.

i just checked, however it still has them listed as UPN/WB networks.

[Greg Bimson]

I think I had this argument elsewhere. I won't be able to dig it up quickly...

There is a definition for superstations. The way it is written, there can be only five superstations, ever, until someone changes the law.

Then, when the SHVERA talks about networks, it is illegal to import a network station where another network station is available, but then excludes the superstations.

However, now that I have read James "changes", the superstation list might just have to drop down to two stations if a superstation is only defined as a network station. But isn't the definition of a network related to being a network as of 1995 or something?

[cj9788]

I thought a broadcaster had to deliver a certian number of hours of programming to a certain number of affilaites before it was considered a network. If in fact the CW meets the requirements to be a full fledge network then they would fall under the same rules for FOX ABC CBS AND ABC wouldn't they?

From JL's post SHVREA calls a superstation a station not affiliated with any network. I alway thought that WB and UPN although calling them selves a network did not broadcast the sufficent number of hours to hold the network status.

Looking at CW's fall schedule they are only broadcastin 15 hours of programing a week. Doesanyone know the actual number of program hours for network status?

[James Long]

It looks like the standard: Conflicting Laws.

17USC119 gives the blanket copyright approvals based on the definitions I copied above. If a station is a network station it CANNOT be a superstation as the definition (even the old one) said 'other than a network station'.

If it's defined elsewhere more narrowly the copyright law in 17USC119 still has it's own definitition. Perhaps if the station falls in the gap they will have to find some other way to pay the copyright fees. Anyways. I offer the definitions above.

The CW seems to have 14 hours of evening programming but there are also daytime and kids programming. 15 hours a week with 25 affiliates in 10 states is all that is needed. Wasn't WB's schedule at least 15 hours?

[Greg Bimson]

I was able to find the passage I was looking for. It is 119(a)(5)(E):(E) Exception. — The secondary transmission by a satellite carrier of a performance or display of a work embodied in a primary transmission made by a network station to subscribers who do not reside in unserved households shall not be an act of infringement if —

(i) the station on May 1, 1991, was retransmitted by a satellite carrier and was not on that date owned or operated by or affiliated with a television network that offered interconnected program service on a regular basis for 15 or more hours per week to at least 25 affiliated television licensees in 10 or more States;

(ii) as of July 1, 1998, such station was retransmitted by a satellite carrier under the statutory license of this section; and

(iii) the station is not owned or operated by or affiliated with a television network that, as of January 1, 1995, offered interconnected program service on a regular basis for 15 or more hours per week to at least 25 affiliated television licensees in 10 or more States.If a superstations signs up for a new network, the new network doesn't have any protection from the superstations. However, if WWOR became FOX, then it loses superstation status.

[cj9788]

The CW seems to have 14 hours of evening programming but there are also daytime and kids programming. 15 hours a week with 25 affiliates in 10 states is all that is needed. Wasn't WB's schedule at least 15 hours?

I counted 15 hours if you include the 7 oclock hour on Sunday.

They have 2 hours monday thru saturday and 3 hours on Sunday.

So they have the 15 hours and definitly have more than 25 stations in more than 10 states so they are a network. But since the supers were supers befor the mentioned dates then the supers should not be going any where right?

This is all very confusing. :(

[Greg Bimson]

Yes, it is confusing.

However, take a look at the exception I posted. It is not an act of infringement if:
1) (paraphrasing) it was a superstation on 1 May, 1991;
2) it was being retransmitted using the superstation license on 1 July, 1998; and,
3) it is not an affiliate of a 1995 network.

There were only four networks in 1995. So the superstations are safe, until one lines up with CBS, NBC, ABC or Fox, or until the law changes.

[James Long]

I was able to find the passage I was looking for. It is 119(a)(5)(E):Which is now 119 (a)(7)(E) thanks to the SHVERA addition of two paragraphs (paragraph 3 for Significantly Viewed and paragraph 4 for markets where LIL is available - renumbering all remaining paragraphs).

Paragraph 7 (was 5) is "Violation of territorial restrictions on statutory license for network stations. -"

It does seem to be the loophole that would allow for Superstations to join newer networks (started after January 1, 1995) without losing status. (And, of course, both the WB and UPN started in January 1995 - right after the definition deadline.)

[Geronimo]

I think that a lot of this speculation started because of anomalies in the DISH website regarding the supers. they seem to be resolved now and people are showing up as qualified.

they are not going anywhere. The WB was logically a network but the quals always exempted it. The CW is similarly exempt. But there are alwaysa lot of people ready to predivt the end of superstatins.

[Greg Bimson]

I was one of those people, until I found the exemption.

[Geronimo]

I understand that it is confusing. I just remind all of the numerous fake deaths that the superstations have undergone and survived.

the next predicted expiration date is February of 2009 when analog broadcasting ends. That is because some read the definition of a superstation to include only the analog stations (digital variations have a -DT in the call letters). I am skeptical of this because because there is no explicit reference to it being only the analog versions and because DISH files an annual report detaining the number of subs to the analog and digital versions of the superstations. That makes no sense if there are no digital superstations.

But if I am not mistaken that whole section of SHVERA will expire sometime in 2009. Which means that the whole issue is likely to be revisited.

Personally I will just enjoy the darned stations as long as they last and I will take akll the predictions of their death with a grain of salt.

[Paul Secic]

Exactly.

The point is this - the "superstations" on the list were in fact "superstations" in the way TBS and WGN are superstations prior to the creation of the WB and UPN networks ten years ago.

WB and UPN were desperate for viewers, so they both decided at the time that their stations would continue to be treated as independents and as such didn't decide to apply the protections contained in the SHVERA to their stations.

Now with the CW, I've read those stations HAVE chosen to ask for the SHVERA protections to apply to their stations, which is why Echostar now has CW network distant local stations in the guide, just as they do for the "major" networks.

On the other hand, MyNetwork TV has chosen to once again forego SHVERA protection, which may be why WSBK is still listed, as most WB stations became CW stations, and most UPN stations became MyNetwork TV stations.

Now, the question is whether the stations involved will want Echostar to actively enforce SHVERA against the CW stations. In many markets they may, but Tribune may not care if your local CW station and the remote CW stations are all Tribune stations (so in LA you could watch Denver's KWGN, and in Denver you could watch KTLA.)

Or at least I'm hoping that's the way it turns out, as I've been faithfully watching the KTLA Morning News every weekday since 1992, even though I live in Colorado, and I really don't want to have to give that up now... :confused:


I too would hate to lose KTLA just for The Morning News. It's the best local news show!

[Paul Secic]

I counted 15 hours if you include the 7 oclock hour on Sunday.

They have 2 hours monday thru saturday and 3 hours on Sunday.

So they have the 15 hours and definitly have more than 25 stations in more than 10 states so they are a network. But since the supers were supers befor the mentioned dates then the supers should not be going any where right?

This is all very confusing. :(

The news isn't affiliated with CW and it's local on Tribune's stations so that doesn't count.

[Geronimo]

Exactly.

The point is this - the "superstations" on the list were in fact "superstations" in the way TBS and WGN are superstations prior to the creation of the WB and UPN networks ten years ago.

WB and UPN were desperate for viewers, so they both decided at the time that their stations would continue to be treated as independents and as such didn't decide to apply the protections contained in the SHVERA to their stations.

Now with the CW, I've read those stations HAVE chosen to ask for the SHVERA protections to apply to their stations, which is why Echostar now has CW network distant local stations in the guide, just as they do for the "major" networks.

On the other hand, MyNetwork TV has chosen to once again forego SHVERA protection, which may be why WSBK is still listed, as most WB stations became CW stations, and most UPN stations became MyNetwork TV stations.

Now, the question is whether the stations involved will want Echostar to actively enforce SHVERA against the CW stations. In many markets they may, but Tribune may not care if your local CW station and the remote CW stations are all Tribune stations (so in LA you could watch Denver's KWGN, and in Denver you could watch KTLA.)

Or at least I'm hoping that's the way it turns out, as I've been faithfully watching the KTLA Morning News every weekday since 1992, even though I live in Colorado, and I really don't want to have to give that up now... :confused:



Where did you read that the CW has asked for "SHVERA protection" or that My network did not---BTW wsbk is not affilaited with MY Network.

To be sure any station could decide to enforce syndex---heck my local ABC affilaite could be upset that WSBK has Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy----but I have seen absolutely nothing toindicate that there will be any chnage in syndex enforcement------and nobody seems to have actually lost the supers or the ability to buy them from DISH.

[cj9788]

I stand corrected the CW only has 13 hours of primetime shows scheduled. According to their website (http://www.cwtv.com/) they do not have programing scheduled on Saturdays. So that is good news because it would mean the CW is not a network according to SHVERA.

[Geronimo]

They have daytime programming Saturday---five hours worth no less---And I don't thank that it has to be primetime.

[cj9788]

No it just says "15 or more hours per week to at least 25 affiliated television licensees in 10 or more States" so I do not know if the WB kids progrtaming during the week and on sunday's is included.

[tampa8]

Geronimo is correct. You can go back over 6 or 7 years ago on forums that were around then and see posts about the end of Supers coming. By the way, with all this talk about distants and locals - you can also see posts about how Satellite won't/shouldn't have local channels. With the stiffer competition from Cable and other sources now, good thing they did get them.

[joblo]

CW, like WB before it, distributes 30 hours a week of programming:
3-5 PM and 8-10 PM ET M-F
7AM-12PM Saturday
5-10 PM ET Sunday

WB was eligible for DNS, and so is CW.

Now with the CW, I've read those stations HAVE chosen to ask for the SHVERA protections to apply to their stations
Probably all this is referring to is that the WB never filed under 17USC119(a)(2)(D)(iv) to receive DNS subscriber lists from the DBS companies, whereas the CW, which is run by CBS, probably has filed.

On the other hand, MyNetwork TV has chosen to once again forego SHVERA protection
What MyNet has chosen, like UPN before it, is not to distribute the requisite 15 hours a week to be eligible for DNS.


Paragraph 7 (was 5) is "Violation of territorial restrictions on statutory license for network stations. -"
Right. Like I said before, it’s an exception to the infringement provisions.

And the same set of stations is exempted from retrans consent in 47USC325, and explicitly subjected to network non-dup and syndex in 47USC339.

[James Long]

No it just says "15 or more hours per week to at least 25 affiliated television licensees in 10 or more States" so I do not know if the WB kids progrtaming during the week and on sunday's is included.There is no reason why it shouldn't be included. The law doesn't say 15 or more prime time hours per week ... it just says hours.

The caveat is the law Gregg pointed out ... it will not be considered a violation of territorial restrictions unless the network existed on January 1st, 1995. (The station also had to be on satellite on July 1st, 1998, and on satellite but not a network station on May 1st, 1991. One of those wonderful legal definitions that defines a set of stations without naming them. :) )

UPN and the WB didn't exist on January 1st, 1995. They premiered later in that month.

[Geronimo]

there are two things in play. One is whether the network ststus precludes them from being a superstation. It does not because of the provision about the creation date of the network. Dor instance the CW might be anetwork in terms of allowing for tranmission of distant nets but NOT a network in terms of stripping affilaites of superstation status.

The other is whether CW is a network for other purpsoes---and it is. I am not sure that they have to file under SHVERA or anywhere else to obtain that status. Thy have to file to get the lists mentioned in the refernce above but whetehr they file or not they a re still a network.

[James Long]

The only reason to 'file' would be to complain about infringement.

[Geronimo]

Yes. that seems to be correct.