No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, Defendants-Appellees.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, Defendants-Appellees."

Transcription

1 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 1 of 36 No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOX BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC., TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORP., AND FOX TELEVISION HOLDINGS, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. DISH NETWORK L.L.C. AND DISH NETWORK CORP., Defendants-Appellees. ON APPEAL FROM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO. 12-CV BRIEF FOR AMICUS CURIAE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS Jane E. Mago Jerianne Timmerman Bart Stringham Benjamin F. P. Ivins National Association of Broadcasters 1771 N Street, N.W. Washington, DC (202) Mark J. Prak Charles F. Marshall Julia C. Ambrose Laura S. Chipman BROOKS, PIERCE, McLENDON, HUMPHREY & LEONARD, LLP 150 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1600 Raleigh, NC (919) December 20, 2012 Attorneys for National Association of Broadcasters

2 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 2 of 36 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CASES AND AUTHORITIES... ii STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO FILE... 1 INTEREST OF AMICUS... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT... 2 ARGUMENT... 4 I. AUTOHOP AND SIMILAR AD-STRIPPING SERVICES WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE INJURY TO FREE, OVER-THE-AIR LOCAL TELEVISION SERVICE... 6 A. Congress Has Long Recognized the Importance of a Free, Local Broadcasting Service... 7 B. Advertising Is the Lifeblood of Free, Local Television Service C. Ad-Stripped Television Services Harm the Continued Viability of Free, Local Television Service II. AUTOHOP IS EMPLOYED BY DISH FOR ANTICOMPETITIVE PURPOSES THAT RUN COUNTER TO CONGRESS S CAREFULLY CONSTRUCTED LEGAL FRAMEWORK DESIGNED TO PRESERVE ACCESS TO FREE, LOCAL TELEVISION SERVICE CONCLUSION CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE i

3 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 3 of 36 CASES TABLE OF CASES AND AUTHORITIES CBS Broad., Inc. v. EchoStar Communs. Corp., 450 F.3d 505 (11th Cir. 2006) Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association v. FCC, 275 F.3d 337 (4th Cir. 2001) Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) TiVo, Inc. v. EchoStar Corporation, 640 F. Supp. 2d 853 (E.D. Tex. 2009), rev d and rem. in part, 646 F.3d 869 (11th Cir. 2011) Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622 (1994) United States v. Sw. Cable Co., 392 U.S. 157 (1968) WPIX, Inc. v. ivi, Inc., 691 F.3d 275 (2d Cir. 2012)... 18, 22, 23 STATUTES 17 U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C , U.S.C , U.S.C ii

4 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 4 of 36 REGULATIONS 47 C.F.R OTHER AUTHORITIES Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, Pub. L. No , 106 Stat (1992)... 7, 12, 28 Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, S. Rep. No (June 28, 1991) (Conf. Rep.) EchoStar Satellite Corp. v. Young Broadcasting, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd (2001) In the Matter of Broadcast Localism, Notice of Inquiry, 19 FCC Rcd (2004)... 7 In the Matter of Broadcast Localism, Report on Broadcast Localism and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 23 FCC Rcd 1324 (2007)... 7 Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999, H.R. Rep. No (Nov. 9, 1999) (Conf. Rep.)... 7, 28 Lisa Lapan, Note, Network Television and the Digital Threat, 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 343 (2009)... 19, 21 Satellite Home Viewers Act of 1988, H.R. Rep. No , pt. 2 (Sept. 29, 1988) Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2009, S. Rep. No (Dec. 22, 2010) RULES Fed. R. App. P iii

5 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 5 of 36 STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO FILE All parties to this case have consented to the filing of this brief pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a). No party or counsel thereof authored this brief; no person other than amicus contributed money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting this brief. INTEREST OF AMICUS The National Association of Broadcasters ( NAB ) is a non-profit, incorporated trade association of radio and television stations and broadcasting networks. NAB serves and represents the American broadcasting industry, advocating before Congress, the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ), and the courts on behalf of its members. NAB submits this brief in support of Petitioners Fox Broadcasting Company, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., and Fox Television Holdings, Inc. (collectively, Fox ). On behalf of its members, NAB has a strong interest in assisting the Court to understand the potential severity of the harm visited upon the local television industry by the AutoHop service and, in turn, by the District Court s Order denying a preliminary injunction to suspend that service. NAB has concerns about the impact of this case on the advertising revenue that is essential to the viability of the local television industry and the availability of free, over-the-air television as a valuable product to consumers. Specifically, 1

6 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 6 of 36 NAB firmly believes that allowing Dish s ad-skipping AutoHop service to continue during the pendency of the present case will cause immeasurable and irreparable harm to local television stations as well as networks. The continued financial viability of our nation s system of free over-the-air television is a matter of significant public interest. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Local television broadcasters have long served the public interest by providing highly-valued, locally-oriented television programming responsive to the specific needs and interests of their local communities. Broadcasters ability to produce and deliver local programming, as well as national news, sports, and entertainment programming produced by the television networks, relies significantly on the revenue generated by television ads. But advertising provides value to advertisers and can produce revenue for broadcasters only if the advertisements actually reach television viewers. Dish Network s PrimeTime Anytime with AutoHop technology service ( AutoHop ) strips every advertisement from network affiliates copyrighted primetime programming streams but, tellingly, not from competing primetime cable programming streams. If not enjoined, the AutoHop service will cause irreparable injury to local broadcasters ability to continue delivering valuable local and network programming to viewers free of charge. If advertising spots in 2

7 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 7 of 36 broadcast programming particularly the most popular network primetime programming cannot reach viewers, broadcast programs will lose their value to advertisers, who will move their ads to competing platforms. Broadcasters, in turn, will have fewer financial resources to invest in producing and acquiring expensive local and network programming, including local news and critical emergency information. Taken to its logical end, ad-stripped television could spell the end of free, over-the-air broadcast television and the important public interests it serves. Dish s ad-stripping service is anticompetitive and upsets the careful balance crafted by Congress through decades of telecommunications and copyright legislation. Dish makes the infringing copies at issue for AutoHop use. Dish also strips commercials from broadcast programming in violation of various copyright laws and its contract with Fox. This infringing conduct is used to further Dish s own self-interest at broadcasters expense. The District Court s refusal to enjoin the AutoHop service effectively will grant Dish a blank check to engage in anticompetitive conduct that will undermine the foundations of our nation s local broadcast service that is built upon advertising. 3

8 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 8 of 36 ARGUMENT Ever since the Bulova Watch Company purchased a 10-second television advertisement that aired on NBC on July 1, 1941, advertising has served as the principal means by which television stations ensure that the public has access to free, local news, weather, sports, public affairs, and life-saving emergency information, as well as top-rated national network news, public affairs, and entertainment programming. More than seventy years later, Dish boasts of providing commercial-free television for its paying subscribers. While Dish s pitch of commercial-free television may sound, at first blush, like a boon for consumers, it is actually adstripped 1 television that represents an unlawful body blow to the long-term viability of local broadcast television service. By marketing a service that automatically strips commercials from television s most-watched programming (that is, ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC network primetime programming) viewed by millions of Americans, Dish is, in an unlawful and anticompetitive fashion, 1 Dish s promotional materials referring to commercial free television reflect its desire to recast its subscription service in a populist fashion. The service, however, is more properly described as ad-stripped television given Dish s unilateral decision to strip commercials that are otherwise a component of the broadcast signals made available to Dish. While all consumers of television have the right to select what programs to watch and what programs to ignore, the commercial advertising component of free, local television s business model is critical to the regulatory structures carefully crafted by Congress and the FCC to govern the video distribution ecosystem. 4

9 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 9 of 36 intentionally attempting to strip the lifeblood from local stations ability to fund important local programming and to acquire popular network and syndicated programming. Two significant errors in the District Court s opinion raise serious concern for local television stations. First, the District Court failed to apprehend the immediate, inestimable, and irreparable harm that ad-stripped television could wreak on the advertising-supported model for free, local television service. A trial and subsequent appeals in this matter could take years. And, like other infringing technologies, copycat ad-stripped television services will undoubtedly arise to hasten the demise of broadcast advertising revenues. Indeed, DirecTV is already positioned to pounce in the event that this Court does not enjoin Dish s illegal activity. 2 Second, the District Court s refusal to acknowledge that Dish, rather than the consumer, actually makes the copies of the broadcast programming at issue reflects a fundamental mischaracterization of Dish s AutoHop service and encourages the very anticompetitive conduct that Congress has sought to prohibit in the television distribution marketplace. If allowed to stand, the District Court s decision will make it next to impossible for any broadcaster to enforce its intellectual property 2 See ER (Brennan Decl. 30, 33). 5

10 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 10 of 36 rights against Dish or any other multichannel video programming distributor ( MVPD ) who makes copies of broadcast programming. 3 I. AUTOHOP AND SIMILAR AD-STRIPPING SERVICES WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE INJURY TO FREE, OVER-THE-AIR LOCAL TELEVISION SERVICE Fox correctly argues that the injury in this case flows from both the adskipping AutoHop service used with Prime Time Anytime and Dish s copying of broadcast programming required for the consumer to employ AutoHop. 4 More importantly, the irreparable injury to local broadcast television service from the use of AutoHop will reverberate far beyond the decline in the Fox Network s primetime advertising revenue. Widespread use of AutoHop and similar technologies by other MVPD services would decrease the advertising revenue streams of local television stations, which would, in turn, threaten the continued viability of free, over-the-air, local broadcast television service that Congress has sought to promote and preserve for more than 70 years. 3 CBS executive Leslie Moonves recently explained that CBS simply cannot produce episodes for $3.5 million apiece and have the people at Dish say they will pull out the commercials. Harry A. Jessell, Take Your Cue From Moonves: Skip Dish, TV NewsCheck (Sept. 14, 2012, 3:33 PM), 4 The District Court itself acknowledges the seamless connection between the making of the quality assurance (QA) copies and the functioning of AutoHop: Dish also makes QA copies of the primetime line-ups to ensure that AutoHop, when enabled, functions properly on PTAT recordings. ER

11 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 11 of 36 A. Congress Has Long Recognized the Importance of a Free, Local Broadcasting Service. The foundation of local television broadcasting was laid in the Communications Act of 1934, which required local broadcast stations to serve the public interest. 5 A cornerstone of broadcasters public interest obligation is to promote localism by offering programming that is responsive to the specific needs and interests of the local communities that they serve. 6 Congress and the FCC have repeatedly affirmed the importance of promoting and preserving localism in broadcast television programming when legislating on issues affecting carriage of local broadcast stations. 7 5 See 47 U.S.C. 309(a). 6 In the Matter of Broadcast Localism, Notice of Inquiry, 19 FCC Rcd (2004), 1, 4 ( [L]ocalism has been a cornerstone of broadcast regulation for decades. ). 7 Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, Pub. L. No , 2(a)(10), 106 Stat. 1460, (1992) ( A primary objective and benefit of our Nation s system of regulation of television broadcasting is the local origination of programming. There is a substantial governmental interest in ensuring its continuation. ); accord Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999, H.R. Rep. No , at 92, 101 (Nov. 9, 1999) (Conf. Rep.) (containing Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act) ( SHVIA Report ) ( [T]elevision broadcast stations provide valuable programming tailored to local needs, such as news, weather, special announcements, and information related to local activities. ); In the Matter of Broadcast Localism, Report on Broadcast Localism and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 23 FCC Rcd 1324 (2007), 6 ( [O]ur broadcast regulatory framework is designed to foster a system of local stations that respond to the unique concerns and interests of audiences within the stations respective service areas. ); see also United States v. Sw. Cable 7

12 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 12 of 36 Television stations promote localism through locally-produced news and investigative reporting, coverage of local weather, traffic, and sports, and various local political affairs programming, including candidate debates and interviews. This local programming is highly valued and trusted by viewers across the country. 8 NAB has repeatedly chronicled the countless hours that local television stations have invested in locally-originated programming and community outreach initiatives to further broadcast localism. 9 Co., 392 U.S. 157, 177 (1968) (declaring local broadcasting to be demonstrably a principal source of information and entertainment for a great part of the Nation s population ). 8 Indeed, Americans get their local news from local TV more than any other source. See Pew Research Ctr., Pew Internet & American Life Project, Understanding the Participatory News Consumer 3 (Mar. 1, 2010), available at PIP_Understanding_the_Participatory_News_Consumer.pdf (explaining that on a typical day, 78% of Americans say they get news from a local TV station ); Television Bureau of Adver., TV Basics Report (June 2012), available at ( TV Basics ) (noting that most consumers choose local stations for this information); National USC Annenberg- Los Angeles Times Poll Shows Local Television News Rules With Voters, USC Annenberg News (Aug. 24, 2012), Events/News/120824LATimesPoll.aspx (reporting voters relying more on local broadcast television news for daily news than any other source); Pew Research Ctr. for People & the Press, Further Decline in Credibility Ratings for Most News Organizations (Aug. 16, 2012), available at (finding higher credibility ratings for local TV news outlets compared to cable news outlets). 9 See, e.g., Comments of the National Association of Broadcasters, In the Matter of Broadcast Localism (FCC Docket No ) (filed Apr. 28, 2008); see 8

13 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 13 of 36 Local emergency programming is a critical component of localism a veritable lifeline to a community in times of crisis. Local television stations work hand-in-hand with local governments, charities, and first responders to help communities avoid, prepare for, and survive a disaster, and even to help rebuild communities that are torn apart. 10 The administrator for the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA ) made this telling observation prior to Hurricane Irene s landfall: Those local broadcasters are going to be giving you the best information, real time, from those local officials out of those press conferences. So make sure you[ ve] got your radio and television. 11 Dish and other subscription television services provide nothing akin to this level of emergency information. Without access to broadcasters local emergency programming, local citizens would lose a lifeline of trusted information for which there is no ready replacement. also Hurricane Sandy, Licensed To Serve: A Chronicle of Broadcasters Community Service Initiatives, sandylts.html (last visited Dec. 20, 2012) (compiling examples of Hurricane Sandy relief efforts nationwide) ( Hurricane Sandy ). 10 See Brian Stelter, Rare Footage Indeed: Tornadoes, In Real Time, N.Y. Times, Apr. 29, 2011, at A20, available at us/29forecast.html?_r=0 (reporting extraordinary efforts of local stations to provide live coverage of tornadoes to save lives in Alabama); see also Hurricane Sandy. 11 Interview by Ali Velshi with Craig Fugate, Administrator, Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, CNN American Morning (Aug. 25, 2011), transcribed at 9

14 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 14 of 36 Production of this locally-originated programming is expensive. It requires a significant investment in newsgathering resources by local stations teams of reporters and staff, camera crews, satellite trucks, state-of-the-art weather radar systems, local studios, and, most recently, an expensive upgrade to all-digital broadcasting equipment. Today, television broadcasters continue to increase their investment in local newsgathering resources despite challenging economic conditions. 12 By contrast, MVPDs, such as Dish, have far fewer public interest obligations and offer only a tiny fraction of the type of local programming produced by a single local television station. Beyond providing uniquely focused local television programming, local stations also provide viewers access to top-rated national news, sports, and entertainment programming through their affiliation with television networks such as Fox. This programming is also very expensive to produce or acquire. As a result, networks contract with local television stations, as network affiliates, to broadcast network programs in local markets throughout the country which leads to more viewers and, correspondingly, greater advertising revenues for networks. Network programming includes both network spots that generate advertising 12 In the last year, broadcast television news staffing has grown to near record levels, and stations have maintained or increased their news budgets. See Bob Papper, RTDNA/Hofstra University, 2012 TV and Radio Staffing and News Profitability Survey, Part I, available at vv1.pdf. 10

15 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 15 of 36 revenue for the network that produces the programming (e.g., Fox s X-Factor) and a smaller number of local spots that generate valuable and critical advertising revenue for the local stations affiliated with the network. This network-affiliate relationship benefits both local stations and national networks, and it has flourished in a fashion that also yields tangible benefits for the American public. Networks receive the benefit of national coverage of their programs to increase advertising revenue. Affiliates receive top-rated programming throughout the broadcast day to complement local programming and provide advertising inventory to sell within network programming. The public receives a mix of local and national programming that is selected and delivered by local television stations at no charge to the consumer. Congress has recognized that the unique combination of national and local interests fostered by the network-affiliate relationship has served the country well. 13 Dish s AutoHop service compromises the Fox Network s ability to acquire, produce, and monetize quality news, sports, and entertainment programming. It also undermines the advertising availabilities of local television stations affiliated with Fox. The effect is to impact directly and adversely the financial viability of local network-affiliated television stations. Without the revenue flowing from the 13 Satellite Home Viewers Act of 1988, H.R. Rep. No , pt. 2, at 20 (Sept. 29, 1988). 11

16 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 16 of 36 sale of advertisements in network programming, local stations financial ability to produce local news and other important public interest programming will be compromised. B. Advertising Is the Lifeblood of Free, Local Television Service. Unlike subscription-based MVPD services, local television stations offer programming free of charge. Congress and the Supreme Court have specifically acknowledged the government s interest in ensur[ing] that every individual with a television set can obtain access to free television programming. 14 More than 53 million consumers rely solely on free, over-the-air broadcast television 15 a number that is growing, not shrinking, due to the multiple and diverse offerings that local television stations are able to provide in high-definition 14 Turner Broadcasting Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622, 647 (1994); Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, Pub. L. No , 2(a)(12), 106 Stat. 1460, (1992) ( There is a substantial governmental interest in promoting the continued availability of such free television programming, especially for viewers who are unable to afford other means of receiving programming. ). 15 NAB Press Release, Over-the-air TV Viewership Soars to 54 Million, (June 18, 2012) (quoting GfK-Knowledge Networks, Home Technology Monitor 2012 Ownership Survey and Trend Report (Spring 2012)) ( NAB Press Release ); ER 256, (Brennan Decl. 8, Exhibit C). 12

17 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 17 of 36 (HD) format, on multiple channels, and, increasingly, on mobile platforms. 16 In addition, minority households make up 44 percent of over-the-air viewers. 17 Twenty-eight percent of all Asian households, 23 percent of African-American households, and 26 percent of Latino homes are broadcast-only. 18 Advertising is the only business model capable of funding the enormous capital and operating costs necessary to provide free local programming. Approximately 90 percent of television station revenues are derived from advertising. 19 Television networks, such as Fox, also rely on advertising to fund the expense of producing popular national news, entertainment, and sports programming. 20 In the 70 years since the first television advertisement was aired on NBC in 1941, advertisements have often been as integral a part of television history as the 16 See Comments of the National Association of Broadcasters, In the Matter of Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming, pp (FCC Docket No ) (filed Sept. 10, 2012). 17 See NAB Press Release. 18 See id. 19 See Local TV, Pew Research Ctr. Project for Excellence in Journalism, The State of the News Media 2010: An Annual Report on American Journalism (2010), at 9, available at 20 ER 256 (Brennan Decl. 10). 13

18 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 18 of 36 programming that they support especially during high-profile events such as the Super Bowl. 21 Television advertisements also include public service announcements ( PSAs ), station promos, and political and issue advertising. Station promos promote important local programming such as news, weather, sports, and emergency information. PSAs are generally aired, at no cost, to promote community awareness of important issues such as cancer prevention. 22 Political and issue advertisements are an important vehicle by which candidates and interest groups advocate their positions to the public. Advertising only works, of course, if the advertisements actually reach the viewers. Although some percentage of viewers may take steps to avoid watching an advertisement e.g., by changing the channel, taking a break to grab a snack, 21 Suzanne Vranica, Higher Prices Don t Keep Marketers Away from Ad Time for the Super Bowl, Wall St. J., Jan. 3, 2012, available at (reporting on importance to marketers and popularity of Super Bowl television advertisements); Stuart Elliott, Early Kickoff for Marketers at Super Bowl, N.Y. Times, Dec. 11, 2012, at B3, available at (quoting a marketer regarding viewer interest in commercials at Super Bowl time: [W]e know viewers are engaged in the watching of the commercials. There is no other place where you get so many purposeful eyeballs. ). 22 Broadcasters Support Health Initiatives, Licensed To Serve: A Chronicle of Broadcasters Community Service Initiatives, s/publicservice/102012LTS.html (October 2012) (compiling examples of broadcaster community outreach and service on health issues). 14

19 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 19 of 36 making a phone call television advertisements continue to reach a remarkably large number of consumers, and television remains a top-tier platform for national, regional, and local businesses. 23 The same is true for PSAs, station promos, and political advertising. Television advertisers rely on a measuring stick called the C3 rating to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular television program to reach viewers. 24 The C3 rating measures the average number of commercials viewed during the live broadcast of a particular television program and for the subsequent three days on a DVR. 25 As a result, C3 ratings have a direct impact on the price advertisers are willing to pay to place an advertisement in a particular program. 26 Advances in technology have enabled viewers to watch television programs on a variety of different platforms after the live broadcast. Unlike AutoHop, many 23 Industry reports show that television advertising is the most effective at reaching consumers. TV Basics 24. And advertisers know that [a]dvertising on television satisfies most large marketers goals better than alternatives, and its advantages hold as more consumers watch more TV more often than any other medium. Stuart Elliott, In Evolving Media Landscape, Television Holds Sway, N.Y. Times, May 13, 2012, at B9, available at 05/14/business/media/in-evolving-media-landscape-television-holds-sway.html? pagewanted=all&_r=1& (quoting Brian Wieser, an advertising research analyst). 24 See ER 256 (Brennan Decl. 10); ER 342 (Liodice Decl. 7). 25 See id. 26 See id. 15

20 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 20 of 36 of these platforms include advertising or, at the very least, require the viewer to manually fast-forward through the advertisements (a functionality that provides value to advertisers because the viewer can still view, and may even play, certain commercials during the fast-forwarding process). 27 Invariably, the terms and conditions under which advertising is (or is not) included in the platforms is governed by contract. The growth of these new advertising platforms has led broadcasters and advertising agencies to consider changing the advertising rating metric to better capture the viewers who watch time-shifted programming through DVR and similar technologies. 28 Even as the video on demand ( VOD ) submarket is rapidly evolving, Dish s AutoHop service threatens to eliminate networks and local stations ability to sell advertising in this developing market. 27 Furthermore, because AutoHop unlike traditional fast forward functionality skips through advertisements entirely, consumers do not even have an opportunity to see which commercials they are missing. This takes away consumer choice and also eliminates some of the branding and impressions that users would otherwise be exposed to if using a standard fast forward function. Advertisers will view this negatively. ER 266 (Brennan Decl. 32); see also ER 342 (Liodice Decl. 6). The Sony case permits consumers personally to make a copy of a program for home use and fast forward as they wish. Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984). Dish s AutoHop service goes far beyond the bounds of the conduct permitted by Sony. It is a commercial service made available for a fee. 28 See Wayne Friedman, Nets Consider C7 Standard, ABC Cuts Deal, MEDIA DAILY NEWS, Dec. 18, 2012, article/189620/nets-consider-c7-standard-abc-cuts-deal.html#axzz2ft0npjp8. 16

21 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 21 of 36 Dish s AutoHop service does far more than time shift when viewers can watch certain broadcast programming. It effectively removes all advertisements from those programs. Moreover, Dish has opted to offer AutoHop only with respect to the product offerings of the Big Four networks (ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC) and to do so by providing the necessary equipment and service for a fee. By stripping commercials out of popular broadcast programs such as American Idol, The Big Bang Theory, Modern Family, or Sunday Night Football but not cable programs such as Mad Men or The Daily Show Dish is intentionally endeavoring to undercut the value of local stations advertising spots on broadcast programming. C. Ad-Stripped Television Services Harm the Continued Viability of Free, Local Television Service. AutoHop eliminates all commercials in primetime network programming thereby eliminating any advertising value of those programs when they are viewed on Dish s AutoHop service or any similar service offered by other MVPDs. Worse, by targeting primetime programming, Dish has targeted the very programming that generates the most advertising revenue, per advertising spot, for both national networks and local stations See ER 257 (Brennan Decl. 11) ( Primetime is the evening block of television programming that attracts the most viewers, and advertisers therefore are willing to pay the highest prices to have their commercials shown during this time. ). 17

22 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 22 of 36 The harm that will befall broadcasters from Dish s ad-stripped television service can hardly be overstated. If AutoHop is allowed to continue, nothing will prevent Dish from expanding its use into other popular programming, and nothing will prevent DirecTV, cable systems, or other competitors from offering similar ad-stripping services. 30 With no commercials in popular broadcast programming retransmitted by MVPDs, the ratings for those programs will plummet. 31 When those ratings plummet, the broadcast programs will, obviously, be far less attractive to advertisers. 32 Indeed, the only audiences guaranteed to receive 30 See WPIX, Inc. v. ivi, Inc., 691 F.3d 275, 286 (2d Cir. 2012) (recognizing the substantial likelihood of copycat infringers in holding that the illegal Internet streaming of television broadcast signals by ivi tv caused irreparable harm to television stations). 31 Dish subscribers using PrimeTime Anytime and AutoHop will no longer see the advertisements paid for by advertisers. This will lower the number of viewer impressions for commercials... and negatively impact the C3 ratings.... Because advertisers typically pay less for commercials with less viewers, Fox s ability to sell advertising will suffer. While I am confident that low C3 ratings translate into lower revenues, it would be very difficult to calculate Fox s precise financial loss. ER (Brennan Decl. 31). 32 See ER 266 (Brennan Decl. 33) ( If competitors do the same thing, which is inevitable if Dish is not enjoined, then many millions of television viewers will stop seeing commercials. As a result of this massive reduction in viewer impressions, many advertisers will be unwilling to pay the same rates for commercials. ). 18

23 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 23 of 36 television advertisements and possibly retain advertising are the 18 percent of television viewers that rely exclusively on free, over-the-air television. 33 Faced with such a drastic reduction in their audience reach for television commercials, advertisers will move their advertising to competing platforms direct mail, online, social media, and, worse, the competing television distribution platforms such as Dish that strip broadcast advertisements in the first place. 34 The record in this case is replete with knowledgeable testimony that the financial losses from the elimination of advertising revenue from primetime and other popular programming will undermine the entire viability of the advertising-based model that has sustained free, local television service. 35 Television executives, Moody s rating service, and other industry researchers and experts all confirm, in their own descriptions, how this chain of events can rapidly destroy the advertising model that supports broadcast television service See NAB Press Release (quoting GfK-Knowledge Networks, Home Technology Monitor 2012 Ownership Survey and Trend Report (Spring 2012)) (approximately 17.8% of television households rely solely on over-the-air broadcast television). 34 See ER 343 (Liodice Decl. 8); see generally Lisa Lapan, Note, Network Television and the Digital Threat, 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 343 (2009) ( Lapan Note ) (discussing television s prominence in viewership and advertising sales). 35 See, e.g., ER 252 (Smith Decl. 6-7); ER 266 (Brennan Decl. 32). 36 AutoHop has the potential to devour the ad model. ER , (Brennan Decl. 32, Exhibit D); Moody s Investors Service Announcement, 19

24 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 24 of 36 Without access to advertising revenue from their top-rated programming, local stations will have fewer financial resources to invest in expensive local programming, including news and emergency information programming, and broadcast networks such as Fox will no longer be able to afford to produce expensive network programming. To the extent lower-rated broadcast programming may continue to attract advertisers, that revenue could not possibly support the high costs of producing critical local news and public affairs programming or of acquiring the rights to popular network programming. To add insult to injury, broadcast networks and their affiliates cannot recoup their losses through their own VOD services because of AutoHop. Networks often employ their own VOD Internet technologies for consumers to access popular programming after its original air date, and they often insert additional commercial spots (that some networks split with affiliates) to help fund these additional platforms for accessing free, over-the-air broadcast programming. But AutoHop Moody s Says Dish Network s AutoHop Feature Has Negative Credit Implications Across the TV Industry (May 25, 2012), ER 252 (Smith Decl. 6); ER (Haslingden Decl. Exhibit D). Moreover, studies have shown advertising losses to television stations and programmers to be immediate losses, while distribution services might feel the impact more gradually. See, e.g., Jeffrey A. Eisenach, Video Programming Costs and Cable TV Prices, filed by The Walt Disney Company in FCC MB Docket Nos , , 07-52, p.28 (April 23, 2010) (citing research that advertising revenues [to programmers] are lost right away ). 20

25 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 25 of 36 will draw viewers away from such platforms. To the extent broadcasters use their VOD Internet offerings to control the distribution of their video programming, broadcasters will still face competition from a distributor making unlawful use of their own product. In short, ad-stripped television taken to its logical end, could spell the end of free broadcast television. And the end could come quickly once Dish s competitors offer their competing ad-stripped television services. Given the average time for trial and appeals in the respective jurisdictions in this case, 37 local broadcasters could face ad-stripped television for more than 3 years more than enough time to destroy the necessary flow of advertising revenue to keep broadcast television healthy and alive The median time interval from filing to disposition by trial of a civil case in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, is 20.1 months. See Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 2011 Annual Report of the Director: Judicial Business of the United States Courts (2012) (Table C5), available at appendices/c05sep11.pdf. The median time interval for merit termination of appeals from filing in lower court to final disposition in appellate courts in the Ninth Circuit is 36.3 months. Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 2011 Annual Report of the Director: Judicial Business of the United States Courts (2012) (Table B-4A), available at JudicialBusiness/2011/appendices/B04ASep11.pdf. 38 See, e.g., Lapan Note at (2009) (discussing the fall of the music industry due to digital piracy and the television industry s ability to beat the pirates based solely on commercial advertising and control of content); see also Blockbuster s Fall and Netflix s Rise, in Pictures, Dealbook (Feb. 24, 2011), 21

26 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 26 of 36 The Second Circuit has recently recognized the irreparable harm that unlawful, infringing technologies can have on local broadcast television service. In WPIX, Inc. v. ivi, Inc., the Second Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction granted to broadcasters against ivi tv, a company that retransmitted the signals of local television stations over the Internet without the consent of the stations and without paying any compensation to the stations for the retransmission of those signals. 39 The Court determined that ivi s retransmissions could harm broadcasters advertising revenue by reducing, fragmenting, and diverting the number of viewers, which would drastically change the industry especially as copycat services emerged. 40 The Court described a chain of events that would threaten to destabilize the entire industry that is very much like the chain events that will almost certainly occur if Dish is not enjoined in this case: The absence of a preliminary injunction would encourage current and prospective retransmission rights holders, as well as other Internet services, to follow ivi s lead in retransmitting plaintiffs copyrighted programming without their consent. The strength of plaintiffs negotiating platform and business model would decline. pictures/ (chronicling the rise of Netflix and Blockbuster s steep decline to bankruptcy in less than 2 years); see also ER 343 (Liodice Decl. 8) F.3d at See id. at

27 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 27 of 36 The quantity and quality of efforts put into creating television programming, retransmission and advertising revenues, distribution models and schedules all would be adversely affected. These harms would extend to other copyright holders of television programming. Continued live retransmissions of copyrighted television programming over the Internet without consent would thus threaten to destabilize the entire industry. 41 The loss of substantial advertising resulting from AutoHop could cause at least as much if not greater harm as the unauthorized retransmissions at issue in ivi because AutoHop and similar ad-stripped television services could ultimately strip all advertisements from broadcast programming immediately. When broadcast programs lose their value to advertisers, the injury to broadcasting is far more than the initial losses in advertising revenue. Rather, the injury extends downstream to jeopardize the important local broadcast programming that is funded by a station s ability to access (and generate revenue from) popular network programming, which, in turn, jeopardizes the continued financial viability of local television broadcast service. II. AUTOHOP IS EMPLOYED BY DISH FOR ANTICOMPETITIVE PURPOSES THAT RUN COUNTER TO CONGRESS S CAREFULLY CONSTRUCTED LEGAL FRAMEWORK DESIGNED TO PRESERVE ACCESS TO FREE, LOCAL TELEVISION SERVICE The District Court s most egregious error was likening AutoHop to the Sony Betamax home video cassette recorder and other services which allow a 41 Id. 23

28 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 28 of 36 consumer to make copies of broadcast programming to conclude that AutoHop does not infringe Fox s reproduction right in its copyrighted primetime programming. That conclusion does not square with the facts of this case or existing law, and it runs counter to Congress s clear intent to preserve free, overthe-air broadcasting against anticompetitive practices by MVPDs. The District Court s conclusion that the consumer, rather than Dish, makes the copies of the broadcast programming is not supported by Sony or the Cablevision decisions relied upon by the District Court. A Betamax was a home recorder popular in the 1980s that allowed consumers to manually record all or part of any television program on a Betamax tape without being able to delete the commercials during a recording. Here, by contrast, Dish is the entity that (1) preselects only broadcast programs to be recorded, (2) makes an illegal copy and records those programs on its own technology, (3) decides the length of time each copy is available for viewing, and (4) strips the commercials from the programs. There is, in fact, nothing that Dish does not do in copying the programs once a consumer chooses to enable or activate Dish s AutoHop service. The fact that the consumer initiates the service does not make the consumer the copier of the program any more than it makes a consumer the copier of a book or a song that she orders from an online bookseller or music retailer by pushing a button on her computer. 24

29 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 29 of 36 More troubling is the District Court s admission that Dish has a degree of discretion over the copying process beyond that which was present in Cablevision, but the Court s refusal, nevertheless, to find that Dish actually made the copies because it required consumers to enable Dish s illegal copying. 42 The District Court plainly misapprehended both the law and facts underpinning the technology on this point, and its refusal to issue the requested injunction effectively gives Dish (and other MVPDs) a blank check to copy all or part of any broadcast program on its own technology, for any purpose, so long as a consumer clicks a button, checks a box, or otherwise assents to the copying process. This logic simply cannot stand. Dish s stripping of advertisements from broadcast programs also infringes Fox s exclusive right to prepare derivative works under 17 U.S.C Dish s AutoHop copies unlawfully create derivative works that are decidedly different than the broadcast programs that are transmitted from Fox to Dish pursuant to their retransmission consent agreements because those programs include several commercial breaks with multiple commercials within each break. Also, by stripping commercials from Fox s programming without authorization, Dish separately violates 17 U.S.C. 122(e). Because network-affiliated television stations do not give Dish (or other MVPDs) a private copyright license for 42 ER

30 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 30 of 36 distribution of television content, Dish (and other MVPDs) must rely on a statutory copyright license to do so. That license, however, prohibits the content of the particular program in which the performance or display is embodied, or any commercial advertising or station announcement transmitted by the primary transmitter during, or immediately before or after, the transmission of such program, [from being] in any way willfully altered by the satellite carrier through changes, deletions, or additions, or is combined with programming from any other broadcast signal. 43 Dish s infringing conduct is patently anticompetitive. It is well established that [t]he broadcasters principal competitors in the television programming delivery market are the cable and satellite industries. 44 Cable and satellite providers compete with broadcasters for advertising revenues by selling advertising spots during certain live programming on their respective systems. By designing a commercial service that effectively strips advertisements in broadcast programming but does not strip the commercials in cable programs that it distributes, Dish attempts to advantage itself while harming the advertising revenue streams that are so critical to supporting local television service. Consumers who U.S.C. 122(e) (emphasis added); see also 17 U.S.C. 119(a)(6) (similar provisions for satellite retransmission of distant broadcast signals); 17 U.S.C. 111(c)(3) (similar anti-stripping provisions for cable retransmission of broadcast programming); see also 47 C.F.R (j). 44 Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Ass n v. FCC, 275 F.3d 337, 344 (4th Cir. 2001). 26

31 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 31 of 36 enjoy local stations broadcast of news, weather, and sports will ultimately be worse off. Dish s copyright infringement also allows it to pursue another anticompetitive aim to drive down retransmission consent fees for broadcast programming. The law governing satellite retransmission of broadcast signals provides television stations with the option to elect between must carry and retransmission consent. If must carry is elected, the station is guaranteed carriage but is not compensated. If retransmission consent is chosen, carriage is not guaranteed, but all terms and conditions of carriage are negotiated. It is common practice in the television industry for broadcasters to negotiate retransmission agreements for MVPDs to redistribute the entirety of their broadcast signals. MVPDs have long sought to reduce retransmission consent fees in order to maximize their own profits. If MVPDs were able to cherry pick the portions of the broadcast signals they wanted to retransmit, they would have both the incentive and ability to do so for their own self-interest. And by unilaterally stripping valuable advertising from broadcast programming through AutoHop and similar technologies, the quality of broadcast programming will suffer, and MVPDs will attempt to use the decline of broadcast programming to reduce the rates they pay for broadcast signals. 27

32 Case: /20/2012 ID: DktEntry: 23 Page: 32 of 36 In sum, Dish s copyright infringement creates an anticompetitive outcome that disrupts the very careful and deliberate balancing of interests that Congress has achieved through decades of telecommunications and copyright legislation. Congress has repeatedly sought to curb illegal and anticompetitive conduct by subscription-based MVPD services in order to preserve all Americans ability to access free, local over-the-air television service. 45 The District Court s decision, if allowed to stand, will severely harm the public interest by effectively giving Dish a blank check to destroy the foundation of the Nation s local television service that Congress, the FCC, and the courts have long sought to preserve. Dish has a long and well-documented history of 45 See Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Pub. L. No , 2(a)(16) (1992) ( As a result of the economic incentive that cable systems have to delete, reposition, or not carry local broadcast signals coupled with the absence of a requirement that such systems carry local broadcast signals, the economic vitality of free, local broadcast television and its ability to originate quality local programming will be seriously jeopardized. ); S. Rep. No , at (June 28, 1991) (Conf. Rep.) (discussing the threat of anticompetitive cable practices to the viability of local television stations and their service to their local communities); SHVIA Report at 100 ( The Committee reasserts the importance of protecting and fostering the system of television networks as they relate to the concept of localism. ); 17 U.S.C. 119 (limiting compulsory copyright license for satellite retransmission of distant signals); see also Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2009, S. Rep. No , at 2 (Dec. 22, 2010) ( The reason for this [distant signal] limitation was to preserve localism and to prevent non-local or distant signals from taking viewers away from local stations that provide community-focused programming such as local news and weather. ). 28

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming MB Docket No. 12-203

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the h Matter of Public Notice on Interpretation of the Terms Multichannel Video Programming Distributor and Channel as Raised in Pending

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of Carriage of Digital Television Broadcast Signals: Amendment to Part 76 of the Commission s Rules CS Docket No. 98-120

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Case: 15-56420, 02/03/2016, ID: 9852375, DktEntry: 19, Page 1 of 44 No. 15-56420 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC; TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION;

More information

No IN THE ~uprem~ ~ourt o[ ~ ~n~b. CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Petitioner, V. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ET AL., Respondents.

No IN THE ~uprem~ ~ourt o[ ~ ~n~b. CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Petitioner, V. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ET AL., Respondents. ;:out t, U.S. FEB 2 3 20~0 No. 09-901 OFFiCe- ~, rile CLERK IN THE ~uprem~ ~ourt o[ ~ ~n~b CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Petitioner, V. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ET AL., Respondents. ON PETITION

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) In the Matter of ) ) Sports Blackout Rules ) MB Docket No.

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) In the Matter of ) ) Sports Blackout Rules ) MB Docket No. Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 ) In the Matter of ) ) Sports Blackout Rules ) MB Docket No. 12-3 ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS NAB Law Clerk

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Applications of AT&T Inc. and DIRECTV For Consent to Assign or Transfer Licenses and Authorizations MB Docket No. 14-90

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Amendment to the FCC s Good-Faith Bargaining Rules MB RM-11720 To: The Secretary REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

More information

ADVISORY Communications and Media

ADVISORY Communications and Media ADVISORY Communications and Media SATELLITE TELEVISION EXTENSION AND LOCALISM ACT OF 2010: A BROADCASTER S GUIDE July 22, 2010 This guide provides a summary of the key changes made by the Satellite Television

More information

CRS Report for Congress

CRS Report for Congress Order Code RS20425 Updated March 14, 2003 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Satellite Television: Provisions of SHVIA and LOCAL, and Continuing Issues Summary Marcia S. Smith Resources,

More information

THE FAIR MARKET VALUE

THE FAIR MARKET VALUE THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF LOCAL CABLE RETRANSMISSION RIGHTS FOR SELECTED ABC OWNED STATIONS BY MICHAEL G. BAUMANN AND KENT W. MIKKELSEN JULY 15, 2004 E CONOMISTS I NCORPORATED W ASHINGTON DC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

More information

CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web

CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Order Code RS20425 Updated June 20, 2002 Satellite Television: Provisions of SHVIA and LOCAL, and Continuing Issues Summary Marcia S. Smith Resources,

More information

WikiLeaks Document Release

WikiLeaks Document Release WikiLeaks Document Release February 2, 2009 Congressional Research Service Report RS22175 Satellite Television: Provisions in SHVERA Affecting Eligibility for Distant and Local Analog Network Signals Julie

More information

ACA Tunney Act Comments on United States v. Walt Disney Proposed Final Judgment

ACA Tunney Act Comments on United States v. Walt Disney Proposed Final Judgment BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Owen M. Kendler, Esq. Chief, Media, Entertainment, and Professional Services Section Antitrust Division Department of Justice Washington, DC 20530 atr.mep.information@usdoj.gov Re: ACA

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington DC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington DC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington DC 20554 In the Matter of Amendment of Part 101 of the Commission s Rules to Facilitate the Use of Microwave for Wireless Backhaul and Other Uses

More information

Ensure Changes to the Communications Act Protect Broadcast Viewers

Ensure Changes to the Communications Act Protect Broadcast Viewers Ensure Changes to the Communications Act Protect Broadcast Viewers The Senate Commerce Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee have indicated an interest in updating the country s communications

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20554

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20554 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) MB Docket No. 12-83 Interpretation of the Terms Multichannel Video ) Programming Distributor and Channel ) as raised

More information

SOME PROGRAMMING BASICS: PERSPECTIVE FROM A SATELLITE LAWYER MICHAEL NILSSON HARRIS, WILTSHIRE & GRANNIS LLP MAY 2008

SOME PROGRAMMING BASICS: PERSPECTIVE FROM A SATELLITE LAWYER MICHAEL NILSSON HARRIS, WILTSHIRE & GRANNIS LLP MAY 2008 SOME PROGRAMMING BASICS: PERSPECTIVE FROM A SATELLITE LAWYER MICHAEL NILSSON HARRIS, WILTSHIRE & GRANNIS LLP MAY 2008 Perhaps the most important obstacle facing any video provider is obtaining the rights

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Assessment and Collection of Regulatory ) MD Docket No. 13-140 Fees for Fiscal Year 2013 ) ) Procedure for Assessment

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of 2010 Quadrennial Regulatory Review Review of the Commission s Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPORT ON CABLE INDUSTRY PRICES

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPORT ON CABLE INDUSTRY PRICES Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Implementation of Section 3 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 Statistical Report

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Annual Assessment of the Status of ) MB Docket No. 14-16 Competition in the Market for Delivery ) Of Video Programming

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPORT AND ORDER AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPORT AND ORDER AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Implementation of Section 203 of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 (STELA) Amendments to Section

More information

[MB Docket Nos , ; MM Docket Nos , ; CS Docket Nos ,

[MB Docket Nos , ; MM Docket Nos , ; CS Docket Nos , This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 11/27/2018 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2018-25326, and on govinfo.gov 6712-01 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

More information

Legal Memorandum. In this issue, link to information about. Developments: FCC Proposes New Video Description Rules. April 29, 2016

Legal Memorandum. In this issue, link to information about. Developments: FCC Proposes New Video Description Rules. April 29, 2016 Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard, LLP Counsel to VAB (919) 839-0300 250 West Main Street, Suite 100 Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 977-3716 April 29, 2016 Legal Memorandum In this issue, link

More information

Statement of the National Association of Broadcasters

Statement of the National Association of Broadcasters Statement of the National Association of Broadcasters Hearing before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet May 10, 2007 The National Association

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., et al., AEREO KILLER LLC, et al.

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., et al., AEREO KILLER LLC, et al. Case: 15-56420, 02/03/2016, ID: 9853221, DktEntry: 22, Page 1 of 30 No. 15-56420 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., et al., v. AEREO KILLER LLC,

More information

PUBLIC NOTICE MEDIA BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE VIDEO DESCRIPTION MARKETPLACE TO INFORM REPORT TO CONGRESS. MB Docket No.

PUBLIC NOTICE MEDIA BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE VIDEO DESCRIPTION MARKETPLACE TO INFORM REPORT TO CONGRESS. MB Docket No. PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12 th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 DA 19-40 February 4, 2019

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Promoting Innovation and Competition in the Provision of Multichannel Video Programming Distribution Services ) ) )

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: ) ) Authorizing Permissive Use of the Next ) GN Docket No. 16-142 Generation Broadcast Television Standard ) ) OPPOSITION

More information

2015 Rate Change FAQs

2015 Rate Change FAQs 2015 Rate Change FAQs Why are rates going up? TV networks continue to demand major increases in the costs we pay them to carry their networks. We negotiate to keep costs as low as possible and will continue

More information

MAJOR COURT DECISIONS, 2009

MAJOR COURT DECISIONS, 2009 MAJOR COURT DECISIONS, 2009 Comcast Corp. v. FCC, 579 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2009) Issue: Whether the thirty percent subscriber limit cap for cable television operators adopted by the Federal Communications

More information

114th Congress BROADCASTERS POLICY AGENDA

114th Congress BROADCASTERS POLICY AGENDA 114th Congress BROADCASTERS POLICY AGENDA Our Mission The National Association of Broadcasters is the voice for the nation s radio and television broadcasters. We deliver value to our members through advocacy,

More information

Comments on Recommendations of ECTEL to the NTRC on Revised Draft Electronic Communications Bill

Comments on Recommendations of ECTEL to the NTRC on Revised Draft Electronic Communications Bill Brian Bartlette, Managing Director Winners TV Zimbra consultation@ectel.int Comments on Recommendations of ECTEL to the NTRC on Revised Draft Electronic Communications Bill From : BBartlette

More information

Digital Television Transition in US

Digital Television Transition in US 2010/TEL41/LSG/RR/008 Session 2 Digital Television Transition in US Purpose: Information Submitted by: United States Regulatory Roundtable Chinese Taipei 7 May 2010 Digital Television Transition in the

More information

LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS PROFILES AND TRENDS FOR 2014 AND BEYOND

LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS PROFILES AND TRENDS FOR 2014 AND BEYOND STATE OF THE INDUSTRY REPORT LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS PROFILES AND TRENDS FOR 2014 AND BEYOND December 2013 Copyright Nov. 2013. All Rights Reserved. BIA/Kelsey CONTENTS Executive summary... iv Introduction...

More information

APPENDIX B. Standardized Television Disclosure Form INSTRUCTIONS FOR FCC 355 STANDARDIZED TELEVISION DISCLOSURE FORM

APPENDIX B. Standardized Television Disclosure Form INSTRUCTIONS FOR FCC 355 STANDARDIZED TELEVISION DISCLOSURE FORM APPENDIX B Standardized Television Disclosure Form Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 Not approved by OMB 3060-XXXX INSTRUCTIONS FOR FCC 355 STANDARDIZED TELEVISION DISCLOSURE FORM

More information

ABC v. Aereo: Public Performance, and the Future of the Cloud. Seth D. Greenstein October 16, 2014

ABC v. Aereo: Public Performance, and the Future of the Cloud. Seth D. Greenstein October 16, 2014 ABC v. Aereo: Public Performance, and the Future of the Cloud Seth D. Greenstein October 16, 2014 Legal Issues Does a company that enables individual consumers to make private performances of recorded

More information

Testimony of Gigi B. Sohn President, Public Knowledge

Testimony of Gigi B. Sohn President, Public Knowledge Testimony of Gigi B. Sohn President, Public Knowledge Before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet Hearing on:

More information

Title VI in an IP Video World

Title VI in an IP Video World Title VI in an IP Video World Marvin Sirbu WIE 2017 2017 Marvin A. Sirbu 1 The Evolution of Video Delivery Over The Air (OTA) Broadcast Multichannel Video Program Distributors Community Antenna TelevisionèCable

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Amendment of Section 73.3555(e of the Commission s Rules, National Television Multiple Ownership Rule MB Docket No.

More information

AUSTRALIAN SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION AND RADIO ASSOCIATION

AUSTRALIAN SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION AND RADIO ASSOCIATION 7 December 2015 Intellectual Property Arrangements Inquiry Productivity Commission GPO Box 1428 CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601 By email: intellectual.property@pc.gov.au Dear Sir/Madam The Australian Subscription

More information

Public Performance Rights in U.S. Copyright Law: Recent Decisions

Public Performance Rights in U.S. Copyright Law: Recent Decisions Public Performance Rights in U.S. Copyright Law: Recent Decisions Professor Tyler T. Ochoa High Tech Law Institute Santa Clara University School of Law April 5, 2013 Public Performance Cases WPIX, Inc.

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., ET AL., AEREOKILLER LLC, ET AL.

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., ET AL., AEREOKILLER LLC, ET AL. No. 15-56420 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., ET AL., v. AEREOKILLER LLC, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, Defendants-Appellees. On Appeal from the

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Elimination of Main Studio Rule MB Docket No. 17-106 COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS 1771 N Street,

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Implementation of Section 716 and 717 of the Communications Act of 1934, as Enacted by the Twenty-First Century Communciations

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: ) ) Promoting Investment in the 3550-3700 MHz ) GN Docket No. 17-258 Band ) ) I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY COMMENTS

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF GRAY TELEVISION, INC.

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF GRAY TELEVISION, INC. Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions Docket No. 12-268 COMMENTS

More information

Reauthorizing the Satellite Home Viewing Provisions in the Communications Act and the Copyright Act: Issues for Congress

Reauthorizing the Satellite Home Viewing Provisions in the Communications Act and the Copyright Act: Issues for Congress Reauthorizing the Satellite Home Viewing Provisions in the Communications Act and the Copyright Act: Issues for Congress Charles B. Goldfarb Specialist in Telecommunications Policy June 5, 2009 Congressional

More information

AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., et al. Petitioners, v. AEREO, INC., F/K/A BAMBOOM LABS, INC., Respondent.

AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., et al. Petitioners, v. AEREO, INC., F/K/A BAMBOOM LABS, INC., Respondent. No. 13-461 IN THE AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., et al. Petitioners, v. AEREO, INC., F/K/A BAMBOOM LABS, INC., Respondent. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) ) CSR-7947-Z Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. ) ) ) Request for Waiver of 47 C.F.R. 76.1903 ) MB Docket

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Promoting Innovation and Competition in the Provision of Multichannel Video Programming Distribution Services MB Docket

More information

Submission to Inquiry into subscription television broadcasting services in South Africa. From Cape Town TV

Submission to Inquiry into subscription television broadcasting services in South Africa. From Cape Town TV Submission to Inquiry into subscription television broadcasting services in South Africa From Cape Town TV 1 1. Introduction 1.1 Cape Town TV submits this document in response to the invitation by ICASA

More information

LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS: Maintaining an Important Presence in 2016 & Beyond. August Copyright All Rights Reserved.

LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS: Maintaining an Important Presence in 2016 & Beyond. August Copyright All Rights Reserved. Maintaining an Important Presence in 2016 & Beyond August 2016 Copyright 2016. All Rights Reserved. BIA/Kelsey CONTENTS Executive Summary... 1 Introduction... 3 Viewer Options... 6 Viewing Hours... 6 Subscription

More information

COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the U.S. Copyright Office Library of Congress Washington, D.C. 20559-6000 ) In re Section 302 Report to Congress ) Docket No. 2010-10 ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS April

More information

LINKS: Programming Disputes. Viacom Networks Negotiations. The Facts about Viacom Grande Agreement Renewal:

LINKS: Programming Disputes. Viacom Networks Negotiations. The Facts about Viacom Grande Agreement Renewal: Programming Disputes Viacom Networks Negotiations After long and difficult negotiations we are pleased to inform you that we are finalizing an agreement for renewal of our contract with Viacom Networks,

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 5, 73, and 74 of the ) MB Docket No. 18-121 Commission s Rules Regarding Posting of Station

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Implementation of Section 103 of the STELA ) MB Docket No. 15-216 Reauthorization Act of 2014 ) ) Totality of the

More information

The NBCU Comcast Joint Venture

The NBCU Comcast Joint Venture The NBCU Comcast Joint Venture On December 3, 2009, Comcast and General Electric (GE) announced their intention to merge GE s subsidiary NBC Universal (NBCU) with Comcast's cable networks, regional sports

More information

The NBCU-Comcast Joint Venture

The NBCU-Comcast Joint Venture The NBCU-Comcast Joint Venture On December 3, 2009, Comcast and General Electric (GE) announced their intention to merge GE s subsidiary NBC Universal (NBCU) with Comcast's cable networks, regional sports

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Amendment of Section 73.3555(e) of the ) MB Docket No. 17-318 Commission s Rules, National Television ) Multiple

More information

47 USC 534. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

47 USC 534. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see TITLE 47 - TELEGRAPHS, TELEPHONES, AND RADIOTELEGRAPHS CHAPTER 5 - WIRE OR RADIO COMMUNICATION SUBCHAPTER V-A - CABLE COMMUNICATIONS Part II - Use of Cable Channels and Cable Ownership Restrictions 534.

More information

RATE INCREASE FAQs. Can you tell me what one TV station/network costs?

RATE INCREASE FAQs. Can you tell me what one TV station/network costs? RATE INCREASE FAQs 1 Why are rates going up? 2 Can you tell me what one TV station/network costs? 3 Your services are too expensive...i am going to switch to a different provider. 4 I refuse to pay more

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Expanding the Economic and Innovation ) GN Docket No. 12-268 Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive ) Auctions

More information

) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNITY MEDIA

) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNITY MEDIA Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. In the Matter of Promoting Innovation and Competition in the Provision of Multichannel Video Programming Distribution Services MB Docket No.

More information

Global Forum on Competition

Global Forum on Competition Unclassified DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2013)26 DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2013)26 Unclassified Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 24-Jan-2013 English

More information

Licensing & Regulation #379

Licensing & Regulation #379 Licensing & Regulation #379 By Anita Gallucci I t is about three years before your local cable operator's franchise is to expire and your community, as the franchising authority, receives a letter from

More information

CANADIAN CABLE SYSTEMS ALLIANCE INC.

CANADIAN CABLE SYSTEMS ALLIANCE INC. CANADIAN CABLE SYSTEMS ALLIANCE INC. Submission for Consideration in the Standing Committee on International Trade s Study on Bilateral and Trilateral Trade in North America Between Canada, the United

More information

Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy

Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Australian Broadcasting Corporation submission to Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Response to the Discussion Paper Content and access: The future of program standards and

More information

Broadcasters Policy Agenda. 115th Congress

Broadcasters Policy Agenda. 115th Congress Broadcasters Policy Agenda 115th Congress Broadcasters Policy Agenda 115th Congress Local television and radio stations are an integral part of their communities. We turn on the TV or radio to find out

More information

January 11, Re: Notice of Ex parte presentation in MB Docket No.07-57

January 11, Re: Notice of Ex parte presentation in MB Docket No.07-57 January 11, 2008 ELECTRONIC FILING Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission Office of the Secretary 445 Twelfth St., SW Washington, DC 20554 Re: Notice of Ex parte presentation in

More information

RATE INCREASE FAQs. Can you tell me what one TV station/network costs? I am in a promotional package, are my rates changing now too?

RATE INCREASE FAQs. Can you tell me what one TV station/network costs? I am in a promotional package, are my rates changing now too? RATE INCREASE FAQs 1 Why are rates going up? 2 Can you tell me what one TV station/network costs? 3 4 I refuse to pay more money for lousy service. 5 I am in a promotional package, are my rates changing

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Amendment of Section 73.624(g of the MB Docket No. 17-264 Commission s Rules Regarding Submission of FCC Form 2100,

More information

Cable Rate Regulation Provisions

Cable Rate Regulation Provisions Maine Policy Review Volume 2 Issue 3 1993 Cable Rate Regulation Provisions Lisa S. Gelb Frederick E. Ellrod III Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mpr Part of

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Promoting the Availability of Diverse ) MB Docket No. 16-41 and Independent Sources of ) Video Programming ) REPLY

More information

Competition Works. Consumers Win!

Competition Works. Consumers Win! Competition Works. Consumers Win! Competition, Choice and Value Shape Today s Communications Marketplace National Cable & Telecommunications Association 1 Today s Communications Marketplace Intensely competitive,

More information

March 10, Re: Notice of Ex parte presentation in MB Docket No.07-57

March 10, Re: Notice of Ex parte presentation in MB Docket No.07-57 March 10, 2008 ELECTRONIC FILING Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission Office of the Secretary 445 Twelfth St., NW Washington, DC 20554 Re: Notice of Ex parte presentation in MB

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition, Inc. ) RM-11778 Request for Modified Coordination Procedures in ) Bands Shared Between the Fixed

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Amendment of Section 73.3555(e) of the Commission s Rules, National Television Multiple Ownership Rule ) ) ) ) ) MB

More information

S Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

S Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, S. 1680 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Promoting Spectrum Access for Wireless ) GN Docket No. 14-166 Microphone Operations ) ) Expanding the Economic and

More information

F I L E D May 30, 2013

F I L E D May 30, 2013 Case: 12-10935 Document: 00512256851 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/30/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D May 30, 2013 Lyle

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Promoting Diversification of Ownership In the Broadcasting Services 2006 Quadrennial Regulatory Review Review of the

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 Authorizing Permissive Use of Next ) MB Docket No. 16-142 Generation Broadcast Television ) Standard ) REPLY TO OPPOSITION OF NTCA THE

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Wireline Competition Bureau Seeks Comment on ) WC Docket No. 13-307 Petition of Union Electric Company d/b/a Ameren

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Amendment of the Commission s Rules Related to Retransmission Consent ) ) ) ) MB Docket No. 10-71 REPORT AND ORDER AND

More information

February 8, See Comments of the American Cable Association (filed May 26, 2016) ( ACA Comments ).

February 8, See Comments of the American Cable Association (filed May 26, 2016) ( ACA Comments ). BY ELECTRONIC FILING, Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12 th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554 Re: Joint Petition for Rulemaking of America s Public Television Stations, the AWARN Alliance,

More information

July 3, 2012 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TABLE OF CONTENTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

July 3, 2012 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TABLE OF CONTENTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard, LLP Counsel to VAB (919) 839-0300 250 West Main Street, Suite 100 Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 977-3716 July 3, 2012 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TABLE OF

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: ) ) Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band Spectrum ) GN Docket No. 17-183 Between 3.7 and 24 GHz ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF

More information

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC In the Matter of ) ) Review of the Emergency Alert System ) EB Docket No.

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC In the Matter of ) ) Review of the Emergency Alert System ) EB Docket No. Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Review of the Emergency Alert System ) EB Docket No. 04-296 ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

More information

1. Introduction. 2. Part A: Executive Summary

1. Introduction. 2. Part A: Executive Summary MTN'S RESPONSE TO ICASA'S INQUIRY INTO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION BROADCASTING SERVICES IN TERMS OF SECTION 4 B OF THE ICASA ACT 13 OF 2000 IN GORVENMENT GAZETTE NO. 41070 DATED 25 AUGUST 2017 1 P a g e 1.

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming COMMENTS Matthew

More information

Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights

Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights E SCCR/34/4 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: MAY 5, 2017 Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights Thirty-Fourth Session Geneva, May 1 to 5, 2017 Revised Consolidated Text on Definitions, Object of Protection,

More information

Charles B. Goldfarb Specialist in Telecommunications Policy. January 3, CRS Report for Congress

Charles B. Goldfarb Specialist in Telecommunications Policy. January 3, CRS Report for Congress How the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act (STELA) Updated Copyright and Carriage Rules for the Retransmission of Broadcast Television Signals Charles B. Goldfarb Specialist in Telecommunications

More information

Sinclair Broadcast Group Who We Are

Sinclair Broadcast Group Who We Are SAFE HARBOR The following information contains, or may be deemed to contain, "forward-looking statements" (as defined in the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). Any statements about

More information

Television Audience 2010 & 2011

Television Audience 2010 & 2011 Television Audience 2010 & 2011 Overview The 51 st edition of Television Audience continues your collection of TV Audience reports. This report continues to include annual trends of population and television

More information

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Amendment of Parts 73 and 74 of the ) MB Docket No. 08-253 Commission s Rules to Establish Rules for ) Replacement

More information

Perspectives from FSF Scholars January 20, 2014 Vol. 9, No. 5

Perspectives from FSF Scholars January 20, 2014 Vol. 9, No. 5 Perspectives from FSF Scholars January 20, 2014 Vol. 9, No. 5 Some Initial Reflections on the D.C. Circuit's Verizon v. FCC Net Neutrality Decision Introduction by Christopher S. Yoo * On January 14, 2014,

More information

Federal Communications Commission

Federal Communications Commission Case 3:16-cv-00124-TBR Document 68-1 Filed 10/31/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 925 Federal Communications Commission Office Of General Counsel 445 12th Street S.W. Washington, DC 20554 Tel: (202) 418-1740 Fax:

More information

Case 1:10-cv LFG-RLP Document 1 Filed 05/05/10 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Case 1:10-cv LFG-RLP Document 1 Filed 05/05/10 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO Case 1:10-cv-00433-LFG-RLP Document 1 Filed 05/05/10 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO FRONT ROW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff, vs. No. 1:10-cv-00433 MAJOR

More information