1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

H.R. 2821 Adjacent markets considered local

Discussion in 'Legislative and Regulatory Issues' started by arkieboy, Jun 22, 2007.

  1. Oct 31, 2007 #81 of 105
    Tower Guy

    Tower Guy Godfather

    450
    0
    Jul 27, 2005
    The CSR didn't really help you. A waiver, if it were granted, would get you New York and LA stations in SD or New York only in HD. No Atlanta.

    You have two other options: Install a large outdoor antenna and see if you have any luck with Atlanta over the air. Or find on old, used Dish network receiver and dish and sign up for All American direct. If you are granted a waiver, you'll get the Atlanta stations.
     
  2. Oct 31, 2007 #82 of 105
    cweave02

    cweave02 W4SKO

    283
    0
    Oct 12, 2007
    Thanks Guy - I am going to keep my local cable, which gets three of the ATL stations, but not the one I really want - WSB.
     
  3. Nov 1, 2007 #83 of 105
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    14,946
    295
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    If you really want WSB, take the suggestion to attempt the distant network route (see https://www.mydistantnetworks.com/ ) with an old Dish receiver and dish is a good choice. You'd get both Atlanta and San Francisco if successful.
     
  4. Nov 1, 2007 #84 of 105
    Tower Guy

    Tower Guy Godfather

    450
    0
    Jul 27, 2005
    So I entered zip code 30635 into www.antennaweb.org It stated that there are no stations predicted to serve this location. If this is true for your address, the waivers for Atlanta would be automatic with no approval from the Asheville stations required.
     
  5. Dec 18, 2007 #85 of 105
    texasbrit

    texasbrit Well-Known Member

    5,085
    88
    Aug 9, 2006
    Not true. You need to enter the address at http://directvdnseligibility.decisionmark.com/app/addressform.aspx This says for 30635 that you are not eligible for DNS because you receive DirecTV SD and HD locals in your area.
     
  6. Dec 19, 2007 #86 of 105
    Tower Guy

    Tower Guy Godfather

    450
    0
    Jul 27, 2005
    I was referring to DNS availability for All American Direct, not DirecTV.
     
  7. Dec 19, 2007 #87 of 105
    N5XZS

    N5XZS Legend

    182
    0
    Apr 25, 2002
    Cosponsers now up to 18!!:) Just plugging on baby!!! Sooner the day comes that we all can enjoy next door TV makets in you areas!!


    12-19-07
     
  8. Dec 20, 2007 #88 of 105
    tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,369
    56
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    So realistically how many co-sponsors does it take before we can expect anything to really happen?
     
  9. Dec 20, 2007 #89 of 105
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    Let's talk a bit of reality, then.

    The last two Satellite Home Viewer bills were signed as part of the larger, omnibus packages sent to the Presidents. Therefore, the television pieces that gave us local-into-local and then significantly-viewed and HD local and distant were all part of US Government budget legislation.

    In both cases, they were passed by the House and then the Senate.

    I don't think that can happen, here. Has anyone seen a bill in the Senate that even resembles this bill in the House? If not, I'd be rather surprised if anything is done within the next six months.
     
  10. Dec 20, 2007 #90 of 105
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The last two satellite bills were facing a precise deadline. If they had not been passed the previous laws would have expired. The effect of a deadline gave the opening for tweaking the content more than just changing the expiration date.

    There is no deadline on H.R. (House Resolution) 2821. While I'd like to see it progress there is no pressure to do so ... the bill is likely to die unless there is a serious reason to wake it up. One reason to revisit these issues is the conversion of broadcast to digital in 2009. Perhaps when Congress steps in to make needed tweaks before THAT deadline the changes suggested here can be rolled in.

    The prior satellite bills started off as independent bills prior to being rolled in to the omnibus packages. Everything has to start somewhere.
     
  11. Dec 20, 2007 #91 of 105
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    Right. But my main point is that unless there is similar legislation in the Senate, there is no chance of this happening anytime soon. Just because it could be passed by the House doesn't mean the Senate is even looking at it.

    Keep in mind that one of the main reasons for this bill is to have people in the same state have available to them the local channels that originate in that state. That helps politicians out, such as Dan Boren, whose district contains the part of Oklahoma that receives only Fort Smith, Arkansas local channels. And you'd think some in the Senate would love to see it that way.

    So, if we see work on a similar bill as HR 2821 in the Senate, then we know there is a possibility for legislation to be finalized. Until then, this is only a dream.
     
  12. Jan 1, 2008 #92 of 105
    rsforkner

    rsforkner New Member

    7
    0
    Dec 31, 2007
    I find this discussion very interesting. However I am a complete novice in trying to understand all of the legal issues involved. So I will add my .02 from a very simple minded view.

    In Boynton Beach, FL Comcast delivers all of the West Palm Beach AND Miami local channels. With Direct TV, I am limited to West Palm Beach ONLY. My daughter subscribes to Comcast and Dish just so they can get the Miami locals.

    Regardless of legal issues and permissions to retransmit signals, this just doesn't seem right. Period! Something is wrong with the laws. Period!

    Thanks for listening,
    Bob
     
  13. Jan 1, 2008 #93 of 105
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    The actual difference is "the law" and "the interpretation of the law", as done by the courts.

    There isn't any copyright infringement by the cable companies, because the Supreme Court ruled in 1968 that redistributing a terrestrial signal is not a copyright violation. However, there is still the need to have a carriage agreement with the terrestrial broadcasters in order to redistribute OTA signals. The FCC is responsible for administering which local channels are allowed on a given cable system.

    The rules for satellite differ because there is definitely copyright issues. That is why the legal issues are different.
     
  14. Jan 2, 2008 #94 of 105
    Tower Guy

    Tower Guy Godfather

    450
    0
    Jul 27, 2005
    It's not the laws. Exclamation point!

    DirecTV has the legal right to deliver any station that is considered significantly viewed in your county. For some reason DirecTV has chosen not to deliver Miami stations to you.

    Here's the significantly viewed list for Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County:

    WPTV, 5, West Palm Beach, FL
    WPEC, 12, West Palm Beach, FL (formerly WEAT)
    +WFLX, 29, West Palm Beach, FL
    WFOR-TV, 4, Miami, FL (formerly WTVJ)
    WSVN, 7, Miami, FL (formerly WCKT)
    WPLG, 10, Miami, FL
    +WBFS-TV, 33, Miami, FL

    The entire nationwide list is here:
    http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-187A2.pdf
     
  15. Jan 3, 2008 #95 of 105
    leww37334

    leww37334 Hall Of Fame

    1,529
    0
    Sep 19, 2005
    I have seen this happen several times :
    I am in the Huntsville DMA, local cable provides both Huntsville and Nashville stations, Directv only provides Huntsville.


    Brother is in Evansville Ind DMA, local cable provides Evansville and Nashville stations. I would really like to see a post from anyone here who is receiving a station from Directv that is outside their DMA.
     
  16. Jan 3, 2008 #96 of 105
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    There are a few areas, such as the NY Metro/Tri-state area, as well as in North Carolina. I'm still trying to figure out why it is only on such a limited basis.
     
  17. Jan 3, 2008 #97 of 105
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    It doesn't make much sense for a provider to throw away an advantage like that. When E* was allowed to have SVs there were holes, but they seemed to be trying to implement the process.

    Allowing cable to be the only source of out of DMA TV is odd. A problem with spotbeam size or negotiating with stations to be the only affiliate carried in their DMA would eliminate SOME stations from being carried as SVs, but there should be more than a few.
     
  18. Jan 13, 2008 #98 of 105
    pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    The DMA maps are very weird. Though I live in MA, I'm stuck in RI DMA as Bristol is the only MA county so maligned. Looking at the maps there are other areas of MA and NH that are far much further than I am from Boston included in the Boston DMA. I get most of Boston already OTA, but would like the cleaner satellite signal and all of this DMA. I'm only 35 miles from Boston but can't get these channels on my DirecTV service, while someone in Concord, NH can? Makes no sense...
     
  19. Mar 16, 2008 #99 of 105
    jclewter79

    jclewter79 Hall Of Fame

    1,833
    0
    Jan 8, 2008
    Is their any news on this guys?
     
  20. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,324
    914
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Nope. No update since last August.
     

Share This Page