Senators Introduce Bill on Cable Franchising Issue

LonghornXP said:

Part of that bill states that cable must carry both the analog and HD feeds that a broadcast network offers but if the broadcaster can't work out a deal with the cable company or vice versa within 6 months a deal would be made for them by another party within 1 month. This allows a company to try and get more but stops a company from going crazy.
.

Click to expand...

riffjim4069 said:

Status and Summary for S.1504 - the text of the proposed legislation has not been posted...yet.

Click to expand...

cablewithaview said:

From what I have understood there maybe a Federal tax which would be the same across the board for everyone, without any fee going to local government. either way, I just weather not have the franchise fee in place at all. If cable has to pay it then DirecTV and Dish should have to pay it too along with phone. Argument for years is that DirecTV and Dish doesn't use public ride of way so therefore they shouldn't have to pay it. My question is, how do you think they are able to offer locals? Fiber which runs in what? Right of Way.

Click to expand...

peterl1365 said:

Um, I think you're a tad confused here. DirecTV and Dish offer local channels entirely via satellite. The TV station *might* have a fiber connection to a DBS uplink facility, but that is not considered a right of way.

this what an engineer said "Both fiber back to the west coast for uplink." and "Both Dish and Direct TV have separate headends, and most locals are picked up off-air." something else to note if there head end is to close to where a station signal shoots over it's antenna they will ALSO use fiber from the station to there head end.
there is nothing tad confused about it. still either way they use a "right of way", there is no other way to spell it out.

Click to expand...

cablewithaview said:

peterl1365 said:

Um, I think you're a tad confused here. DirecTV and Dish offer local channels entirely via satellite. The TV station *might* have a fiber connection to a DBS uplink facility, but that is not considered a right of way.

this what an engineer said "Both fiber back to the west coast for uplink." and "Both Dish and Direct TV have separate headends, and most locals are picked up off-air." something else to note if there head end is to close to where a station signal shoots over it's antenna they will ALSO use fiber from the station to there head end.
there is nothing tad confused about it. still either way they use a "right of way", there is no other way to spell it out.

Click to expand...

I think "right of way" generally refers to areas allocated in each neighborhood for underground or aerial distribution to EACH home. This entails access along many miles of public streets. These all have to be documented and monitored so that other public works projects do not disturb any existing wiring (hence, you have to call Dig-Alert before doing ANY digging on your property).

An uplink from a TV station to a head end center is in fact a right of way issue, but it is strictly point to point, and does not even have to be a dedicated connection. I imagine that the parties involved could simply lease a connection from their local phone company or other backbone providers (e.g. MCI, global crossing, etc).

The fact of the matter is that, as far as the consumer is concerned, satellite services do not require any right-of-way, and thus are exempted from franchise fees. If the TV station or DBS uplink center has to pay for right-of-way (in whatever form), then that is just a cost of doing business and is not (directly) passed on to the consumer.

By the way, don't you think cable companies have the same issues? In fact, cable companies get most of their signals via satellite. So it wouldn't surprise me if cablecos and DBS operators, despite being competitors, share many of their costs of terrestrial signal transmission.

Click to expand...