dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
90381
share rss forum feed

brownk

join:2000-06-08
Katonah, NY

[HD] FCC Rules on Verizon Access to MSG HD



bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ
Great news...... Now lets see what cablevision pulls out of the hat to delay it past the imposed 30 day ruling.


nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:16
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to brownk
This is the part I love:

"Today's disappointing rulings do not appear to be based on the facts," said Cablevision in a statement. "The data clearly demonstrates that there has been no competitive harm to the nation's two largest phone companies as a result of not having two HD channels they already receive in SD. New York is the most competitive market in the country and this decision only hurts fair competition and consumers. Instead of competing on the merits in the marketplace, Verizon and AT&T are manipulating federal law to gain an unfair advantage and we have every intention of pursuing relief in the courts."

Typical Dolan spin on reality....Their own commercials brag that only Optimum customers get all 9 local NY teams in HD.

Not sure what facts Cablevision is referring to (they put their own foot in their mouth), but this will probably be tied up in the courts for a while.

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
reply to brownk
My money is CV flips them the bird and files suit to block. As long as there is an open court case, nothing can be enforced


Greg2600

join:2008-05-20
Belleville, NJ
reply to brownk
No surprise this ruling came down, just nobody knew how long it would finally take. CV's only option now is to file a claim against the ruling, likely by saying that the FCC overstepped it's legislative bounds. That of course requires them to be granted an injunction against the 30 day requirement, which they'll probably get. That said, injunctions are not issued for a long time, meaning the case could go to court pretty quickly. I'm no law scholar but I simply don't expect the FCC to be struck down in this matter. The case from Verizon/AT&T relied on competition-based claims, and the laws are meant to spur cable TV alternatives. Not only that, but I am pretty sure that every single claim filed against a with holder like CV has been successful. Time and time again. And like I said all along, the Dolans were not going to be able to fool the FCC that their MSG and CV units are now separate companies. I would be surprised if this case isn't settled by winter.

UofMiamiGrad
Premium
join:2001-02-03
Great Neck, NY
reply to brownk
Links in case anyone wants to read the rulings:

Verizon: »transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Release···94A1.pdf

AT&T: »transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Release···95A1.pdf


bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ
reply to brownk
Another reason why we lead the world in the number of attorneys per capita....

"we have every intention of pursuing relief in the courts"

My guess probably by 2013 it might finally be settled....


TitusTroy

join:2009-06-18
New York, NY
reply to brownk
good news...but I'm sure appeals will keep this in the courts for many more years...only way to get a quick resolution is for Cablevision to concede...plus what's to stop them from overcharging Verizon to make it difficult for them to actually carry the channels

tnsprin

join:2003-07-23
Bradenton, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit
said by TitusTroy:

good news...but I'm sure appeals will keep this in the courts for many more years...only way to get a quick resolution is for Cablevision to concede...plus what's to stop them from overcharging Verizon to make it difficult for them to actually carry the channels

On the last part, the order says "on non-discriminatory rates, terms, and conditions". But unless Cablevision and MSG LP changes their mind it will, as you said, be back in the courts.

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to brownk
CV will just tell the FCC it has no control over MSG-HD and that's it. Then the FCC will have to start all over again with no basis for a ruling

The FCC can make any ruling its wants, it has zero legal enforcement as only laws passed by congress can do this

tennisman94

join:2010-02-18
Palm Harbor, FL
kudos:2
said by guppy_fish:

CV will just tell the FCC it has no control over MSG-HD and that's it. Then the FCC will have to start all over again with no basis for a ruling

The FCC can make any ruling its wants, it has zero legal enforcement as only laws passed by congress can do this

It can sue for enforcement based on its ruling. Then the court would enforce the ruling

Steve3

join:2010-01-28
Springfield, NJ
Either the FCC should levy a hefty fine for everyday past the 30 days that Cablevision does not comply with the ruling or the FCC should ban Cable companies from owning channels. I am not saying that either will be done, but with these people, you must play hard ball.
Expand your moderator at work


nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:16
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to guppy_fish

Re: [HD] FCC Rules on Verizon Access to MSG HD

said by guppy_fish:

CV will just tell the FCC it has no control over MSG-HD and that's it. Then the FCC will have to start all over again with no basis for a ruling

The FCC can make any ruling its wants, it has zero legal enforcement as only laws passed by congress can do this

What are you talking about? The FCC has total control over program access complaints. That is the basis for the ruling. This is totally within the FCC's congressional mandate.

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
The FCC can only apply the mandate when the content is "owned" by the cable company.

The FCC has made a determination that they have no legal authority to do, the FCC is not a court and only a court can determine if the present ownership meets what the law was written to apply too.

MSG was sold, its 100% a separate company and only a court, not three FCC commissioners can make a determination otherwise


Greg2600

join:2008-05-20
Belleville, NJ
reply to brownk
Do you realize you are the only person who is making that point about ownership? It's never in any of the articles written about the case, even by industry insiders. So either they're lax or it's irrelevant in this case.


nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:16
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:

The FCC can only apply the mandate when the content is "owned" by the cable company.

The FCC has made a determination that they have no legal authority to do, the FCC is not a court and only a court can determine if the present ownership meets what the law was written to apply too.

MSG was sold, its 100% a separate company and only a court, not three FCC commissioners can make a determination otherwise

Your ownership argument has no factual basis here. It has been proven before the FCC that Cablevision/MSG has withheld this must-have programming as a way to hinder multiple competitors in the market - plain and simple. You are reading too far into the corporate structure of Cablevision/MSG, which has zero to do with the issue of their behavior (which the FCC ruled on).

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
You are reading Zero into what the FCC has in determining how the rule apply's to CV

Time will tell .. so far for 3+ years I have been right

mets18

join:2008-10-15
New York, NY
Even if they aren't the same company couldn't MSG be engaging in non-competitive behavior by not offering the HD feeds to FIOS? What if ESPN decided to pull their HD feeds from a cable system? I would think that system would pursue legal action.

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to brownk
There is no law that content creators are required to sell to all that which to rebroadcast for profit

The poster child is the NFL and DirectTV sunday ticket. content creators are free to pick and choose whom they sell to.

The only exception is when the content creator is a cable company and that is the basis of this decision, and why now close to two years ago MSG was spun off into its own company


Lcrngrs

@verizon.net
reply to nyranger74
I agree. I was debating the switch because of no msghd so the argument that it doesn't effect competition is nonsense. I did switch to fios because of the superior quality and hardware and bit the bullet. I'd rather watch the rangers in sd then ever go back to CV. They stink.

mets18

join:2008-10-15
New York, NY
reply to guppy_fish
A Cablevision spokesman made this comment, "we have every intention of pursuing relief in the courts."

Relief from what? If MSG is not part of Cablevision than the court decision does not apply to them as they are not the ones controlling who gets MSG-HD and who does not.


bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ
reply to brownk
The sad part is Cablevision will drag their feet again with appeals so they can keep their salesmen going with the "we have MSG HD chant". I hope Im wrong but don't expect to see it on FIOS for a year or more.

skohly

join:2009-08-19
Township Of Washington, NJ
reply to mets18
said by mets18:

A Cablevision spokesman made this comment, "we have every intention of pursuing relief in the courts."

Relief from what? If MSG is not part of Cablevision than the court decision does not apply to them as they are not the ones controlling who gets MSG-HD and who does not.

Incredible how Cablevision insults everybody's intelligence with complete talking out of both sides of their mouth on just about every issue.

Steve3

join:2010-01-28
Springfield, NJ
They did the same thing when they had exclusive rights to MSNBC in the NYC area, until the contract ran out. They are using MSG HD as a selling tool, and promote it that way in their commercials. Personally, I don't watch MSG, but I would love to see it handed to Dolan, who is an asshat.


ROCKnROLD

@verizon.net
I'm reading predictions (guesses) ranging from 30 days to many years before Fios will actually get MSG HD. Is the an attorney out there with expertise in this area who can give us a reasonable estimate based law and precedent? Thank you...

johnmax

join:2009-04-11
Islip Terrace, NY

1 edit
reply to brownk
I wouldnt be suprised if finally when they are forced to relinquish the HD feed to us that we see some "revolutionary" BS feature from CV in their ads to try and soften the blow to their loss of subs.

FiosTV1080I

join:2010-09-06
united state
reply to bohratom
I'm sick of the way the Dolan's are about MSG HD it's gonna take a while for it be on Fios, maybe something next year if were lucky but not gonna hold my breath , its like pulling teeth trying get things in postive manner best Cablevision has goin for them 9 major sports team in HD if that's taken away,then Dolan has nothing much else to with hold the channels but at the end Fios will always be better.


topsg

@verizon.net
reply to ROCKnROLD
I spoke to my lawyer about this and he said that the FCC does in fact have the power to regulate what is on the airwaves in the US, so Cablevision does have to abide by their ruling

djoropallo

join:2003-10-20
Maple Shade, NJ
reply to brownk
I would guess this ruling and the previous rulings on local Sports Networks would have some effect down here in Philly and Comcast Sportsnet, but I know it is still not available on either of the Satellite companies. I do have it now that I switched to FIOS, but I would like to see what happens when the Dishes finally get it.