The local network stations might say that Dish Network chose not to pay for the station for it to air therefore choosing not to provide the station so that could work both ways.
Rumor Alert - Dish to offer all locals!
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 53
- Views 10K
My $64 question is, so if I get Portland, OR locals, will I also be able to
see, let's say, Las Vegas locals. Its pretty funny that with my iPhone
I can listen to virtually any US radio station (how could all those
broadcasters have let that happen!!).
Is it because there is some stupid senator or congressman who is afraid he's
going to lose an election because he can't control "his" local airwaves?
see, let's say, Las Vegas locals. Its pretty funny that with my iPhone
I can listen to virtually any US radio station (how could all those
broadcasters have let that happen!!).
Is it because there is some stupid senator or congressman who is afraid he's
going to lose an election because he can't control "his" local airwaves?
Music is different, as the copyrights are owned by the song writer, not the record companies or even the singer. There are no exclusive contracts signed with the song writers (who want the song heard as many times as possible, since that's how they get more money), therefore you can hear the song on several stations in the same market.
With television though, the production company owns the rights to the program, and in turn sells the distribution rights to the television networks. The Network themselves have set up an exclusive affiliate model to distribute that programming. The have chosen to distribute their property in this manner as it raises the most amount of money.
SHERVA and it's predecessors carved limited exemptions into copyright law to allow distances to those who can't otherwise get the programming. Congress is not blocking anything in regards to distant programming, on the contrary they are forces limited distant programming on the copyright owners.
If Congress were to attempt a wholesale, you can see any network you want on satellite, the courts would kill it quickly, as it blatanly violates the 4th amendment property rights of the programming owners.
The network right now could allow their programming anywhere they want, they just choose not too. As for the affiliates, if they didn't have an exclusive contract for their market, they wouldn't sign up as a network affiliate.
I don't believe a damn thing Dish says because I have been told by all csr's that Bluefield-Beckley would launch 2 weeks ago and by the top notch executives in Colo. they don't know that it is daylight much less anything else. Dish is more invovled in getting programming in China and India and the hell with WV.
More than an "it".... click on the link below and scroll down to transponder 14.
SatelliteGuys.US - Subscription 118.7°W
I'm happy to pay extra to All American for the Chicago stations in HD since the beam is CONUS. I hope E* doesn't screw that up.
I LOVE being the only person in my group of RV'ers that can pick up the networks in HD in the middle of nowhere. For some reason the D*'s don't even bother to try to get RV waivers, they just sit and bitch when they get out of range of their spotbeam.
I LOVE being the only person in my group of RV'ers that can pick up the networks in HD in the middle of nowhere. For some reason the D*'s don't even bother to try to get RV waivers, they just sit and bitch when they get out of range of their spotbeam.
Derwin said, "With television though, the production company owns the rights to the program, and in turn sells the distribution rights to the television networks. The Network themselves have set up an exclusive affiliate model to distribute that programming. The have chosen to distribute their property in this manner as it raises the most amount of money."
Derwin,
Thanks for you informed, thoughtful reply, but why is it I own a RV (and can prove it) that I can get two sets of locals? Aren't those RVers potentially violating somebody's rights? Why do I have less 'rights' than a RVer?
Derwin,
Thanks for you informed, thoughtful reply, but why is it I own a RV (and can prove it) that I can get two sets of locals? Aren't those RVers potentially violating somebody's rights? Why do I have less 'rights' than a RVer?
Because that falls under the limited exemption to copywrite that Congress put into the distant networks legislation. If the exemption wasn't limited in nature, then it would never survive court scrutiny.
RV'ers were included in the exemption because, by their very nature, they are on the go, and thus not tied to one market. The reason for 2 sets, is that 1 is east coast and the other is west coast, since you don't know what coast they will be at.
As an RV'er could it be included in the exemption to allow them local access in the market they find themselves? Is the technology available that allows them to receive the local channels based on the Zip they enter for dish allignment?
It would probably require a software modification to support it. With DVRs it would be hard because timers could be set on channels that go in and out of reception as you move between spot beams. It is way too small an audience for them to put any time and/or effort into it.
