Comcast sues Maine to stop law requiring sale of individual TV channels

Discussion in 'Cable TV Discussion' started by Mark Holtz, Sep 10, 2019.

  1. Mark Holtz

    Mark Holtz Day Sleeper

    10,904
    152
    Mar 23, 2002
    Richardson,...
    From Ars Technica:

    Comcast sues Maine to stop law requiring sale of individual TV channels
    Industry suit says Maine law violates First Amendment and Communications Act.
    FULL ARTICLE HERE
     
  2. Athlon646464

    Athlon646464 Gold Members DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,680
    303
    Feb 23, 2007
    Uxbridge, MA
    Things that make you go 'hmmm'. For sure...
     
  3. James Long

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

    49,149
    1,665
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Telling cable companies that they must sell a la carte violates the right to free speech? I didn't know the tier system was "speech". :D

    There are some federal laws that preempt what the state can do. Federal law requires local channels to be in the base package on cable systems ... so they can't be part of an a la carte system. (Satellite is not required to offer local channels - or to offer them at any particular level - as long as all locals are offered as a group. No selling a local ABC affiliate separate from a local NBC affiliate or splitting off other local stations. One either gets all carried locals or none.) Federal law does not prohibit or require a la carte. Which leaves it up to the states.
     
  4. SamC

    SamC Hall Of Fame

    2,324
    122
    Jan 20, 2003
    First Amendment, no.

    Communications Act. Certainly. It totally pre-empts state regulation in this area.

    And, since a la carte is the most anti-consumer idea ever, good for Comcast, et al.
     
  5. CTJon

    CTJon Godfather

    943
    110
    Feb 5, 2007
    I really don't want a la carte - since I expect I would actually spend the same if not more plus I'm sure if I wanted to add one channel the incremental charge would be high.
     
  6. Mark Holtz

    Mark Holtz Day Sleeper

    10,904
    152
    Mar 23, 2002
    Richardson,...
    It wouldn't be that much of an i$$ue if the per-$ub$criber price wa$ fairly low. The $ore $pot for me i$ the $port$ channel$ like E$PN and the Regional $port$ Network$. Out$ide of the premium channel$, the $port$ channel$ are the mo$t expen$ive channel$ on a per $ub$criber ba$i$, and unle$$ you $ub$cribe to the mo$t ba$ic package, you pay for tho$e $port$ channel$ whether you watch them or not. The $ame with the political bia$e$ for the $o-called "new$" channel$.

    The only solution that I could see out of this message was to stop playing and paying entirely.
     
  7. SamC

    SamC Hall Of Fame

    2,324
    122
    Jan 20, 2003
    You make a fundamental mistake that most supporters of the really bad idea of a la carte make. You assume that the channels would exist for you to buy in the first place.

    They would not. Two things would happen.

    First, lets make up a fake channel, in order to avoid getting OT with "but I like... channel". Say there is a bird owners channel. And it is in the base package. So everyone is paying a fraction of a cent for it. The tiny niche that actually watches it, the 99.99% that do not. Under ALC, only the 0.1% that wants it, pays. And the cost of producing the channel is the same. So it is like $20/month, just for the one channel. Which no one can afford, so it ceases to exist.

    Second, because the remaining channels want to survive, they are going to try to mix up their programming. No more niche of a niche of a niche narrowcasting. Broad channels with something fo everyone, so you pay. Think USA Network, circa 1985. ALC means 20 to 30 channels, available. Max.

    No thank you.
     
    VDP07 likes this.
  8. James Long

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

    49,149
    1,665
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I believe the point was that people wouldn't be asking for a la carte if the total price was low. I'd need a better definition of low. People were asking for a la carte when the prices were much lower than they are today.
     
  9. Mark Holtz

    Mark Holtz Day Sleeper

    10,904
    152
    Mar 23, 2002
    Richardson,...
    Except that the cost of producing the channel isn't the same. The cost of producing original material is always going to be more than purchasing already-produced material. The rights costs for acquiring more recent material is going to be more expensive than material that was produced in the 1950s-1970s.

    Do I serious believe that I will be able to pick and choose individual channels? Not really. My expectation is that if I want MTV, I will also have to pay for VH1, plus the associated MTV/VH1 sub-channels as part of a "Viacom music pack".
     
  10. SamC

    SamC Hall Of Fame

    2,324
    122
    Jan 20, 2003
    Do what? The costs of producing a channel with a particular channel is EXACTLY the same, whatever the content, regardless of the number of viewers or subscribers.

    Lets make an analogy to a movie theatre to understand. Say it is going to show the latest comic book mega blockbuster. The cost to produce it is $X. No mater if one person is there, or the place is full. Your response is "well, they could show a rerun of 1950s B&W western is irrelevant.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall