| Martin's a la carte push doesn't have legal power behind it The main problem with Martin's a la carte push is that he and the FCC don't have the necessary legal authority to ever make it work. He could pass rules forcing cable to offer a la carte. But he doesn't have the power to make the content providers in Hollywood offer their content at prices that would allow a la carte to ever work. And without the power to force Hollywood to stop offering their programs only in packages(like ESPN; ESPN2; ESPNC; etc.), his a la carte advocacy is going nowhere.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
|
|
thumbs down from:
Cabal 
| I think the main problem is the rich in America aren't forced to stand behind their Money and Ideas. |
|
| said by themainproblem :
I think the main problem is the rich in America aren't forced to stand behind their Money and Ideas.
????????? Meaning what?
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
stevephl
join:2000-11-27
Colorado Springs, CO | reply to themainproblem
Obviously the rich in America have in fact stood behind their ideas and money this is how they became rich.
What does this have to do with the article?
a la carte is the wave of the future if certain low viewer programs fall by the wayside so be it, market forces will determine what programs to carry |
|
 MrMoodyFree range slavePremium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:But he doesn't have the power to make the content providers in Hollywood offer their content at prices that would allow a la carte to ever work. Right you are. A little over 10 years ago when Dish Network was starting up and taking suggestions from their customers, they wanted to offer channels a la carte and the providers would NOT let them. |
|
 Jim GurdPremium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:without the power to force Hollywood to stop offering their programs only in packages(like ESPN; ESPN2; ESPNC; etc.), his a la carte advocacy is going nowhere. IANAL but doesn't this amount to illegal product tying? They're forcing you to buy something else in order to get what you really want.
--
We don't care. We don't have to. We're the phone company.
-- Ernestine |
|
1 edit | said by Jim Gurd:said by fAcEtIOUs:without the power to force Hollywood to stop offering their programs only in packages(like ESPN; ESPN2; ESPNC; etc.), his a la carte advocacy is going nowhere. IANAL but doesn't this amount to illegal product tying? They're forcing you to buy something else in order to get what you really want. As best that I can determine, not being a lawyer either, "tying" is illegal at a federal level when it is used by firms ruled to be a monopoly(very very few anymore, MS was the last one I can recall). There are state laws against tying, but those only apply to companies NOT in interstate commerce(very few anymore, the feds rule just about all commerce). So what you are saying is correct, but it would be prosecuted by the Anti-Trust Div of the Dept of Justice. And they have shown little interest in pursuing anti-trust cases since they went after Microsoft.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
