Carriage Agreements

Sometimes a transportation dispute can take months or even years. In September 2012, Time Warner Cable and the National Football League ended a nine-year dispute primarily over NFL Network and then the NFL RedZone Channel. The deal was followed by an earlier deal between the NFL and Cablevision, making Time Warner the last big holdout. Time Warner had proposed running NFL Network to a narrower level of sport, arguing that the relative scarcity of annual games — eight, expanded to 13 — did not justify the costs. SNL Kagan estimated average subscriber fees at 95 cents per month. [18] [19] [20] Some longer litigation is influenced by outside individuals and organizations. In 2003, new York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg helped mediate a deal between Cablevision and YES Network, which prevented many New York Yankees baseball games from being seen by about 3 million local subscribers in the first year of yes Network`s run. [21] [22] In 2006, EchoStar dropped lifetime, the women-only channel, for a competing channel, Oxygen. While Lifetime is partly owned by Disney, which in turn owns ESPN and ABC, the determining factor in renewing the contract came less from the parent company`s firepower than from a mail campaign launched by the National Organization for Women, the YWCA and other groups. [1] A: As a general rule, the FCC does not have the right to participate in discussions between television channels and cable systems on retransmission authorization agreements. The deal is important for Fox, as Comcast is the largest U.S.

cable operator with more than 20 million paying customers in the last quarter. Fox also renewed its shipping contracts with Dish and Charter in October and signed deals with three of the country`s largest pay-TV providers in the past six months. In 2012, Aereo, a small New York program distribution, and several major channels, including CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, Univision and PBS, clashed in 2012. [31] Aereo used small antenna benches to receive over-the-air signals from broadcasters and then made them available to subscribers via the Internet. However, unlike other distributors, the company argued that as an “antenna technology company”, it was exempt from paying royalties for retransmission, just like any home person using an antenna. The channels replied that the Aereo service went beyond the traditional antenna, since it both recorded programmes for subsequent display and calculated a monthly fee for subscribers, thus acting as an intermediary. Aereo won its case in all but one lower court, including a judgment of the Second Court of Appeal of April 1, 2013 [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] But in a decision 6-3 of June 25, 2014, the Supreme Court sided with the channels and ruled that Aereo had infringed copyright law. [38] The history of transport disputes can be considered as two different circumstances: the first concerned air-to-air broadcasters whose signals can be picked up by an antenna; The second concerns broadcasters who broadcast by cable, satellite or other means, but not by air. In the United States, the former led to a quagmire of litigation involving the Federal Communications Commission and the courts, changing rules, and copyright issues — all revolved around the fundamental question of whether a carrier has an intrinsic right to transmit an over-the-air signal again. . .


Reacties zijn gesloten.