Modern television Act of 2019 Bipartisan Bill Introduced to Combat Blackouts

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by sparky27, Aug 6, 2019.

  1. Aug 6, 2019 #1 of 10

    sparky27 Member

    Jun 25, 2019
  2. Aug 6, 2019 #2 of 10
    James Long

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

    Apr 17, 2003
    Even if passed it does little until 42 months after enactment ... so four years from now?

    "Repeals retransmission consent, compulsory copyright licenses, and several other outdated statutory provisions and regulations. This would allow free-market contract negotiations to happen under traditional copyright law. "
    Distants are carried under the cuplulsory license. You're not really repealing retransmission consent when you give control to the broadcasters to withhold their signals.

    "Preempts federal, state, and local authority to regulate rates of cable services."
    Who does this help?

    "Ensures consumers have access to local programming by retaining the ability of a local television broadcast station to require carriage on cable and satellite providers in their local market. (Effective immediately, no change in law.)"
    So "Must Carry" lives on, "Consent to carry" is "repealed" (but stations can refuse to be retransmitted).

    Not an improvement.

    What we need is all stations become must carry with a compulsory license, rates set by the copyright office - not stations demanding $2 per subscriber (and more in four years). I'd rather see free retransmission, but I am willing to compromise with a compulsory rate.
    ibjimbo and sparky27 like this.
  3. Aug 6, 2019 #3 of 10

    SamC Hall Of Fame

    Jan 20, 2003
    This bill does little to fix the problem Congress created when it departed from the Fortnightly system.

    Its main purpose seems to be to allow rural congress members to say they TRIED to do something by backing this do-nothing bill when constituents complain about losing their TV channels.

    BTW, "baseball style arbitraion" means each side picks a number, arbitrator has to pick one or the other, so, theoretically, each has to be realistic. The only loser in this, as in baseball, is the consumer.

    Of course, the solution is to simply repeal this mess, return to the system under which every one prospered, free local TV without payment to Big Media. Any station owner not willing to live on the massive windfall that is local ad sales, free to sign the lisence on the back and send it to me.
    ibjimbo and sparky27 like this.
  4. Aug 6, 2019 #4 of 10

    mwdxer Well-Known Member

    Oct 30, 2013
    Seaside Oregon
    At least IT is a beginning....Most of time we get little out of government.
    ericknolls likes this.
  5. Aug 7, 2019 #5 of 10

    BillJ Icon

    May 5, 2005
    Don't expect anything to happen with Congress. Even if the House passes it, the Senate won't be allowed to vote on it.
    wilbur_the_goose, NashGuy and AZ. like this.
  6. Aug 7, 2019 #6 of 10

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    May 17, 2010
    That's because Congress is the opposite of Progress.
    ericknolls likes this.
  7. Aug 7, 2019 #7 of 10

    AZ. Legend

    Mar 27, 2011
    Well not exactly, but when cooperation/compromise became a bad thing, here we are....Doing nothing for the masses.
  8. Aug 7, 2019 #8 of 10
    James Long

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

    Apr 17, 2003
    The minimum would be to kick the can ... extend the current laws by five years. If they don't do that then the market will adjust.
  9. Aug 7, 2019 #9 of 10

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Yeah, the most likely scenario is that the current STELAR law is renewed, except with some new language to make clear that non-profit organizations may only redistribute broadcast TV signals via OTA repeaters and community antenna clear-QAM coax. In other words, no unauthorized redistribution of local channels via the internet, even by non-profits, as Locast is doing.

    It is interesting to think about what would happen to the major broadcast nets if we returned to the pre-STELA regime when locals survived purely on ad dollars and could only invoke must-carry when it came to MVPDs. I have to think that a lot of popular sports would simply leave for paid streaming services and/or cable channels because the networks couldn't afford the contracts purely based on ad dollars. Or at least, they would stand to make significantly MORE by relegating them to their paid channels (e.g. ESPN, CBS All Access, etc.).
  10. Mark Holtz

    Mark Holtz New Texan

    Mar 23, 2002
    Yeah right. The NAB will make sure it's members interests are protected, which is only bad news for the end consumer.
    AZ. likes this.

Share This Page

spam firewall