[opendtv] FCC and NAB Grapple Over Rights Definitions | Broadcasting & Cable

From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: OpenDTV Mail List <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 18:53:38 -0400
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/fcc-and-nab-grapple-over-rights-definitions/138807

FCC and NAB Grapple Over Rights Definitions

The National Association of Broadcasters and some of its biggest network 
members disagree over whether the FCC should step in to redefine linear 
overthe- top providers as multichannel video programming distributors, or let 
the marketplace work out the logistics of fitting new video entrants into the 
mix.

The issue is gaining currency as more programmers launch over-the-top services 
that mirror traditional bundles. The redefinition, which would at minimum 
extend program access rights to online video providers (OVDs), would not apply 
to on-demand services, only those that provide 24/7 channels of programming.

In filings with the FCC, the NAB said it backed the FCC’s redefinition as a way 
to modernize the rules to take into account Internet video distribution, and 
provide alternatives to cable and DBS systems.

But in a separate filing, three of the NAB’s network members—though arguably 
wearing their studio hats most prominently—told the FCC to back off, or at 
least to hold off.

Identifying themselves as video programmers, not broadcasters, CBS, Fox and 
Disney—Comcast/NBCU did not sign on—told the FCC that “there is no market 
failure to address, and imposition of additional regulation may limit, rather 
than increase, the opportunity for consumers to obtain video programming.”

“We didn’t file ourselves and didn’t say anything specific about anyone else 
filing,” said a spokesperson for Comcast when asked if the company associated 
itself with either the NAB arguments—NBC is a member—or the NCTA—with Comcast 
being its largest member. CBS, Fox and Disney, by language, were sounding more 
like they were in the cable than broadcast camp.

In its filing, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association said the FCC 
should let the marketplace work without intervention.

The NAB, by contrast, wants to make sure the FCC applies more than just 
programming access regulations to OVDs, including must-carry, syndicated 
exclusivity and other responsibilities that go along with MVPD status.

While the NAB says it agrees with the FCC that linear OVDs defined as MVPDs 
should be subject to retransmission consent/must-carry rules, it challenges the 
commission’s silence on how the network non-duplication and syndicated 
exclusivity rules would apply, which it says is “essential to the concept of 
localism.”

Broadcasters are also concerned about not extending geographic signal limits to 
online TV station signal distribution. “The Commission must ensure that its 
expansion of the definition of MVPD does not inadvertently erode the ability of 
broadcasters to serve their local communities,” the NAB said.

Given concerns over the safety and security of content on the Internet, 
according to the NAB, the FCC should find that it is not a per se violation of 
the responsibility to negotiate retrans in good faith that a station decline to 
negotiate—specifically, if an online video provider can’t or won’t demonstrate 
it has the technical ability to protect the TV station signal from piracy or 
forms of “misappropriation.”

Whatever the commission does, the NCTA wants a little more time to respond to 
the arguments by broadcasters and others. Last week, it asked for a 30-day 
extension of the March 18 deadline for those replies.
[opendtv] FCC and NAB Grapple Over Rights Definitions | Broadcasting & Cable

Other related posts:
