Committee Passes Satellite Home Viewer Extension Act
- Thread starter Alan Gordon
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 15
- Views 2K
Alan,thanks for the update,but to be honest w/u this is still vague {to me anyway} as to whats allowed and whats not.In other words,and I do mean common talk not lawyer style rhetoric.What goes and what stays the same.I.E. are Grade B areas still good for distants,I assume "white areas" will stay the same.But if you live in a DMA that is currently broadcasting a digital signal its good-bye to distants,or if your in an area where you qualify for both locals and distants you can choose either or,what about waivers ??? etc.,etc. I appreciate if yourself or anyone else could post any specifics if they may know of any,or if that info is even available yet.Thanks for all your help and info in regards to this !!!!!
FKy.Guy said:
There are smarter people than me who will be able to give you an answer, as most legal/political issues tend to overcomplicate things, but I'll try to answer what I THINK it means.
I'm not sure what you mean by "Grade B" because I'm currently trying to get an OK for a waiver whenever DirecTV transfers us from Pegasus and I have to get approval from two of my "Grade B" stations to receive one. Please explain.
I'm not sure about "white areas", but I assume they will stay the same.
I'm also not sure about the local/distant issues.
However, ONE of the things that it seems to say about the digital signals is that if you live in a station's DMA that is broadcasting in LP, but you do not live in the city that the station is licensed to, then you get a distant "digital" signal until that station goes to full power or when the FCC (during the next two years) have developed a method for identifying households unserved by digital signals.
Again, I'm not sure of what all this bill entails, but hopefully someone here can give you a better answer.
~Alan
Thank you sir !!!,I appreciate your time and reply,I will continue to check back and see how it all plays out.
PS:Grade B is about as you stated its a out laying area of a DMA that still qualifies you for distants but you can also get that areas local`s as well.
PS:Grade B is about as you stated its a out laying area of a DMA that still qualifies you for distants but you can also get that areas local`s as well.
If the bill passes and is signed into law, the FCC will be charged with creating the criteria for implementing the requirements of the bill (these bills are seldom quantitative, just qualitative and the devilish details are left to the implementing agency). After a year of study they will post their proposed rules in the Federal Register and receive public comment. In about 2 years, you will know whether or not the final rules will help your individual situation or not.
Sorry to be so negative, as I've already invested a considerable sum trying to get my local ABC affiliate OTA DTV, so I can watch MNF in HD. No such luck as they are broadcasting from a 60 foot antenna at 1,910 watts in downtown Denver. Anyone beyond their parking lot is SOL for DTV. They don't have any plans to upgrade until the legal battles over new towers on the local broadcast mountain, are finished (a few years away). The bottom line is that the topic will be moot for most or at least many by the time the FCC actually allow things to happen, it the bill is signed into law.
Sorry to be so negative, as I've already invested a considerable sum trying to get my local ABC affiliate OTA DTV, so I can watch MNF in HD. No such luck as they are broadcasting from a 60 foot antenna at 1,910 watts in downtown Denver. Anyone beyond their parking lot is SOL for DTV. They don't have any plans to upgrade until the legal battles over new towers on the local broadcast mountain, are finished (a few years away). The bottom line is that the topic will be moot for most or at least many by the time the FCC actually allow things to happen, it the bill is signed into law.
Carl B said:
I'm not very good at reading these bills, and they look like only a lawyer could understand them, but from what the bill said, it seemed to me that after on January 1, 2005, if you don't live in the city that the stationed is licensed to, then you will be given access to said digital channels (with certain provisions) until that station powers up or the FCC deems you as being "served" by that digital signal, and the FCC has two years to determine whether you are or aren't, which by then, 2007, odds are they may/should be higher powered and capable of serving you with less trouble than it currently is.
~Alan
Carl B said:
It's already moot for most - those living in O&O's will get squat from this bill. What I would have loved to have seen is the multi-DMA ban go away. Being a resident of CT that is in the NYC DMA, this would be a win for people like us (and we're not the only one). Obviously, the NAB lined the pockets of *someone*
FKy.Guy said:
It passed. There were compromises. The digital white area model does not go into effort until the FCC creates it. They have two years. In the interim, DBS companies can offer distant digital service in analog white areas. The bill will now be merged with the Senate Judiciary version and voted on the floor of the Senate sometime after the August recess. The broadcasters will surely try to get Senators to oppose the bill.
That's what I've been told and all I know at this point. I agree with you that someone needs to clarify this more. To me this doesn't sound any different than what qualifies anyone to receive the CBS HD that D & E have now. And if that's the case, why haven't D & E had the other HD nets on that basis right along ? In other words - what's different ?
WaltinVt
I think D & E should do it anyway - get the courts involved.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong - which happens on a regular basis - just ask my wife.
This whole business is not unlike everything else that's happening in this country, special interests are over riding the will of the people and common sense.
The national nets broadcast HD.
The national nets wants viewers to receive their HD.
Some viewers want that HD.
If you can get that HD from your affiliate, fine that's where you get it.
If you can't, then satellite can provide it.
The only people that don't want you to have it is the NAB and the locals that can't give it to you anyway.
I think D, E & Voom should say "piss on it" and put all 4 national nets up now (even Fox in ED). What's the worst that can happen ? As I understand it, there's no current law governing HD anyway, so that just leaves the copyright issues - right ?
Don't the national nets own the copyright for these broadcasts ? All they have to do is tell their locals if they want their viewers back then get on the stick or the next contract negotiations will be a bear.
I bet you'd see one heck of a scramble. And what's the FCC going to do about it? This whole thing would put the transition into high gear. It's nothing more than they were going to do anyway, it's just that they were going to take 2 years to "think" about it.
Show me where I'm wrong here.
WaltinVt
Someone correct me if I'm wrong - which happens on a regular basis - just ask my wife.
This whole business is not unlike everything else that's happening in this country, special interests are over riding the will of the people and common sense.
The national nets broadcast HD.
The national nets wants viewers to receive their HD.
Some viewers want that HD.
If you can get that HD from your affiliate, fine that's where you get it.
If you can't, then satellite can provide it.
The only people that don't want you to have it is the NAB and the locals that can't give it to you anyway.
I think D, E & Voom should say "piss on it" and put all 4 national nets up now (even Fox in ED). What's the worst that can happen ? As I understand it, there's no current law governing HD anyway, so that just leaves the copyright issues - right ?
Don't the national nets own the copyright for these broadcasts ? All they have to do is tell their locals if they want their viewers back then get on the stick or the next contract negotiations will be a bear.
I bet you'd see one heck of a scramble. And what's the FCC going to do about it? This whole thing would put the transition into high gear. It's nothing more than they were going to do anyway, it's just that they were going to take 2 years to "think" about it.
Show me where I'm wrong here.
WaltinVt
waltinvt\ said:
And if that's the case, I think the point is rather "moot" also, and would rather the "significantly viewed" clause were to go into effect than this, which in the end probably won't do a dang thing!
~Alan
OK - Here's a link to the amended bill
I believe this is the link to the amended senate bill as it was passed by the committee.
http://commerce.senate.gov/pdf/s2644amended.pdf
I report - you decide.
WaltinVt
I believe this is the link to the amended senate bill as it was passed by the committee.
http://commerce.senate.gov/pdf/s2644amended.pdf
I report - you decide.
WaltinVt
waltinvt\ said:
Whoa! What a radical idea! Deal the federal government completely out!
I like it. It'll never happen, but I like it.
The only correction I'd make to your otherwise shrewd analysis:
The only people that don't want you to have it is the NAB and the locals that, for whatever reason, don't feel like giving it to you, and will use government force to make sure you don't get it until they are damn good and ready!
