Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

SHVIA Mccain Bill PASSED!!!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
122 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Mr. Shvia

Mr. Shvia

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 9 posts
Joined: May 05, 2004

Posted 21 November 2004 - 05:16 PM

SHVIA Mccain Bill PASSED!!!

It looks to me that about six hours ago the version of the Satellite Bill that
includes Digital White Areas and also allows for people to receive both their
local stations and distants at the same time has passed!!!

Echostar has also posted a statement on their website commending John Mccain.

http://www.corporate...&item_id=646314

#2 OFFLINE   Bobby94928

Bobby94928

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 993 posts
Joined: May 12, 2003

Posted 21 November 2004 - 07:31 PM

The President has line item veto power...... Hmmmmmmm... Let's see how this goes.
Bobby C

#3 OFFLINE   Geronimo

Geronimo

    Native American Potentate

  • Gold Members
  • 8,296 posts
Joined: Mar 23, 2002

Posted 21 November 2004 - 07:41 PM

I believe that line item veto power was decalred unconstitutional back in 1997.
I never cared for all the signatures that insult posters with other points of view.

#4 OFFLINE   SAEMike

SAEMike

    Banned User

  • Banned User
  • 2,596 posts
Joined: May 29, 2004

Posted 21 November 2004 - 07:53 PM

I believe that line item veto power was decalred unconstitutional back in 1997.


It was. The case was Clinton v. The City of New York. The line item veto power which became effective on January 1st 1997, and was declared unconsitutional by the Court in July of 1998 only applied to funding and taxing bills, not to legislation such as this.

#5 OFFLINE   Geronimo

Geronimo

    Native American Potentate

  • Gold Members
  • 8,296 posts
Joined: Mar 23, 2002

Posted 21 November 2004 - 08:39 PM

Thanks Mike I thought it struck it down altogether.
I never cared for all the signatures that insult posters with other points of view.

#6 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,368 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 01:30 AM

The President has line item veto power...... Hmmmmmmm... Let's see how this goes.

One would have to give the president a REASON to line item veto something. And one would have to have access to the president's staff to suggest it.

Hmmm... How many times has the line item veto been used?

JL

#7 OFFLINE   RaceTrack

RaceTrack

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 29 posts
Joined: Jun 11, 2004

Posted 22 November 2004 - 01:54 AM

Did Significantly Viewed pass or not?

#8 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,368 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:10 AM

Did Significantly Viewed pass or not?

Passed.

JL

#9 OFFLINE   SAEMike

SAEMike

    Banned User

  • Banned User
  • 2,596 posts
Joined: May 29, 2004

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:40 AM

Thanks Mike I thought it struck it down altogether.


Sorry Chief, it was struck down all together, what I was explaining is that BEFORE it was struck down it only applied to funding and tax measures, not things such as this :)

Sorry I wasn't clear.

#10 OFFLINE   Geronimo

Geronimo

    Native American Potentate

  • Gold Members
  • 8,296 posts
Joined: Mar 23, 2002

Posted 22 November 2004 - 04:59 AM

Cool.
I never cared for all the signatures that insult posters with other points of view.

#11 OFFLINE   Bobby94928

Bobby94928

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 993 posts
Joined: May 12, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 09:11 AM

Mike,

Thanks for the clarification. Now, then Prez wants the budget, so he's gonna sign it. :yesman:
Bobby C

#12 OFFLINE   Richard King

Richard King

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 21,331 posts
Joined: Mar 25, 2002

Posted 22 November 2004 - 09:58 AM

Did Significantly Viewed pass or not?

Passed.

Fabulous news. This along with digital white areas should be GREAT for satellite and a real blow to broadcast and the NAB. I look forward to eventually getting Orlando locals added to my West Palm Beach locals here midway between the two.

I wonder how they will define "significantly viewed". Anyone know?
The Pump Don't Work 'cause the Vandals Took the Handles.

#13 OFFLINE   BobMurdoch

BobMurdoch

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,009 posts
Joined: Apr 24, 2002

Posted 22 November 2004 - 10:08 AM

Probably the same rules that apply to cable. Here in SE Monmouth Cty., NJ both NY and Philly stations are carried by cable, while satellite forces us into the NY local. My wife will be happy to see Eagles games.

Hopefully they will let us get all of the broadcast networks in HD like we can get with CBS HD now....
"The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." Henry David Thoreau Walden (1854)

:ramblinon


XBox 360 Gamertag::grin:
Posted Image

#14 OFFLINE   BobMurdoch

BobMurdoch

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,009 posts
Joined: Apr 24, 2002

Posted 22 November 2004 - 10:10 AM

Boo. The NAB has three years to stall this thing. It may be 2007 before we can get them........
"The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." Henry David Thoreau Walden (1854)

:ramblinon


XBox 360 Gamertag::grin:
Posted Image

#15 Guest_"mover"_*

Guest_"mover"_*
  • Guests
Joined: --

Posted 22 November 2004 - 12:07 PM

So what happens to people who already receive distant nets and thier LiL's do they stay or do they go now. Do I have to make a choice between my LiL or the distants. And if I must choose can I keep both NY & LA?

#16 OFFLINE   bobmcl

bobmcl

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 54 posts
Joined: May 02, 2002

Posted 22 November 2004 - 12:25 PM

Our local Cable Company Time Warner carries one local Milwaukee station in our area. Will I be able to get Milwaukee from Directv?

Directv customer since Oct 96

#17 OFFLINE   wcswett

wcswett

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 363 posts
Joined: Jan 07, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 01:56 PM

I'm about 20 pages into reading this 100 page bill and I've just noted some things that are new, important and I don't think was in force before. First, the local stations have 30 days to deny a waiver or it is assumed that the waiver is APPROVED. I don't think they had to reply before and the waiver was assumed DISAPPROVED. Second, the satellite companies must periodically submit reports on all locals subscribers, with addresses, to the local stations. Presumably this is so local stations can challenge subscriptions. The rest of the first 20 pages concerns changes to put satellite at parity with cable.

--- WCS
DISH RECEIVERS: 622(x2), 510, 211(x2)
PROGRAMMING: DISH HD Platinum, Atlanta locals
ANTENNAS: 61.5, 110, 119, 129

#18 OFFLINE   wcswett

wcswett

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 363 posts
Joined: Jan 07, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:00 PM

Following on to my previous post, the next 10 pages all concern royalty fees and royalty arbitration. The 15 pages after that deal with low power and superstations and lays out a number of definitions, such as what is a "superstation" and a "low power station". The distances of 35 miles normally and 20 miles if in one of the top 50 urban areas of the country are laid out with respect to the local market of a low power station. The 10 pages after that charge the Register of Copyrights to determine, by Dec. 31, 2005, to what extent current law harms or mitigates harm to copyright holders of broadcast programming. There is more on royalties, and special clauses concerning Alaska. Man it's getting boring at this point!

--- WCS
DISH RECEIVERS: 622(x2), 510, 211(x2)
PROGRAMMING: DISH HD Platinum, Atlanta locals
ANTENNAS: 61.5, 110, 119, 129

#19 OFFLINE   Mr. Shvia

Mr. Shvia

    New Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 9 posts
Joined: May 05, 2004

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:25 PM

Where can we find a copy of this bill? I have been looking like mad on
Senate.gov. All I know is that it was grouped with some kind of spending bill.

#20 OFFLINE   FaxMan

FaxMan

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 111 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:28 PM

Boo. The NAB has three years to stall this thing. It may be 2007 before we can get them........


Can anybody further expand on the provisions of the '3 year' period alluded to in the E* release and some of the posts above?

It would seem a pretty simple procedure to determine if a particular local is being provided LIL and has no digital (or HD) signal. It would also seem that the sat providers would jump pretty quickly on getting time zone appropriate HD feeds from an HD enabled local that would like the additional viewers (=ad revenues).

John

#21 OFFLINE   FaxMan

FaxMan

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 111 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:46 PM

Where can we find a copy of this bill? I have been looking like mad on
Senate.gov. All I know is that it was grouped with some kind of spending bill.


http://www.house.gov...s/h4818divj.pdf

Apparently the SHVIA stuff starts on about page 122.

#22 OFFLINE   wcswett

wcswett

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 363 posts
Joined: Jan 07, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 02:59 PM

Ok, more reading with 10 more pages down... affirms a number of things already mentioned earlier in the bill. Defines "significantly viewed" and charges the FCC with publicly posting a list of "significantly viewed" stations for each DMA. Satellite providers also must do this, by community [presumably they will use zip codes and just update their current eligibility database for LIL]. Also this part provides penalties for bad faith abuse of satellite transmissions: $50/station/day/subscriber charged to satellite carrier for abuse, or $50/station/day/subscriber charged to station(s) for bringing a frivolous charge.

Next 10 pages: retransmission consents and negotiations, more definitions ("network station", "community", etc.), carriage of local stations on a single dish within 18 months (all analog retransmissions on single dish and all digital retransmissions on a single dish but analog and digital don't need to be the same dish if both sets are retransmitted), must-carry rules and non-applicability of low power stations to "must-carry".

Next 10 pages: grandfathering of recipients of distant networks because they don't have access to LIL yet, rules for providing distant networks to other subscribers not prohibited from receiving them [ie. rural areas], special rules for digital transmissions of distant nets to unserved households and where digital isn't available from local stations, time zone must be the same or later for digital distant nets and bandwidth must be the same or greater than off-air broadcast, must switch to local digital from distant digital when local is available and receivable by subscribers.

Next 5 pages: subscriber can request a signal test if denied a waiver, subscriber requests a test through the satellite provider, 30 days to respond, sets out who will test and who will pay.

--- WCS
DISH RECEIVERS: 622(x2), 510, 211(x2)
PROGRAMMING: DISH HD Platinum, Atlanta locals
ANTENNAS: 61.5, 110, 119, 129

#23 OFFLINE   wcswett

wcswett

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 363 posts
Joined: Jan 07, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 03:19 PM

Last ~20 pages: more on notices and waivers between satellite providers and network affiliates, within one year the FCC must determine if current signal testing is adequate for digital signal prediction (must make the determination with reasonable cost of antenna, antenna rotation and indoor vs outdoor - how these factors determine whether a household is served or unserved), notices to subscribers with respect to signal availability and grandfathering, privacy rights of satellite subscribers, study required of FCC to determine the effect of SHVIA on cable competition (9 month deadline), carriage in non-contiguous states, more stuff on Alaska.

That pretty much covers my summary of what's in the new SHVIA extension. I probably missed some stuff and there are a lot of cross-references and references to material in the original SHVIA but this pretty much is the gist of it.

--- WCS
DISH RECEIVERS: 622(x2), 510, 211(x2)
PROGRAMMING: DISH HD Platinum, Atlanta locals
ANTENNAS: 61.5, 110, 119, 129

#24 OFFLINE   Jacob S

Jacob S

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 7,657 posts
Joined: Apr 14, 2002

Posted 22 November 2004 - 03:31 PM

So the subscriber may have to pay now even if it is determined if the station cannot be received? I hear that these tests are not cheap either.

#25 OFFLINE   wcswett

wcswett

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 363 posts
Joined: Jan 07, 2003

Posted 22 November 2004 - 03:36 PM

Can anybody further expand on the provisions of the '3 year' period alluded to in the E* release and some of the posts above?


From my reading, there are a number of dates mentioned from 31 Dec. 2005 to 31 Dec. 2007 that have to do with households being considered "unserved" because they won't be able to receive a DIGITAL signal. The delays I read about seemed to me to be aimed at giving local stations time to get an adequate digital signal out. On balance, the FCC has a year to determine if a new method of calculating signal adequacy should be applied separately to digital signals and what details should be considered such as antenna type, etc. I would draw from my reading that the point of contention is that most locals won't be up to speed digitally by 2006, as they should be, and some of their viewers could be declared "unserved" by 2007. In the meantime an analog grade-b signal will be considered as adequately served. The text is a little turgid and doesn't apply directly to me, so I may have misinterpreted something.

--- WCS
DISH RECEIVERS: 622(x2), 510, 211(x2)
PROGRAMMING: DISH HD Platinum, Atlanta locals
ANTENNAS: 61.5, 110, 119, 129




Protected By... spam firewall...And...