dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
17
share rss forum feed

guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to brownk

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

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:2
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



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

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:2

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.



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.


MisterBill
Verizon FiOS

join:2002-06-05
Yorktown Heights, NY

said by Lcrngrs :

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.

But you just made CV's case because despite not having MSG-HD (which you acknowledged was important), you did switch to FiOS. So in your case, at least, it was not a competitive disadvantage. On the other hand (as nycdave mentioned), their ad stating that they have all 9 NY teams in HD while FiOS doesn't kind of negates their claim about it not being a competitive advantage.

Personally, I hate CV and love my FiOS service and am thrilled that CV lost.


lcrngrs

@verizon.net

I waited for 2 years before making the switch with the hopes of verizon getting msghd. I made the switch after deciding that faster response time, better picture quality and more hd channels were enough to switch. If cable vision felt that having msghd wasn't a bargaining chip why spend millions of dollars telling us about being the only cable company with all major sports teams in HD? Now that IMG 1.9 is out, I'm in my glory.



jetguy28

@verizon.net

It took the FCC long enough to rule on this. It is ridiculous we all know the Dolan's history. Enough is Enough, Chuck should give up and crawl back into his hole. CV is pissed Verizon got into the TV business but CV got into the phone business. Who knows what will happen but I could see Chuckie delaying this as long as he can. The fans are the losers but Chuckie could care less about hte fans judging how he runs the Knicks and the Rangers.


nlk10010

join:2007-06-27
Great Neck, NY

I don't know what the rush is. Even if CV offered MSG-HD to FIOS tomorrow, FIOS isn't adding HD channels. So my understanding is we wouldn't be able to see it anyway for, well, I don't know how long (unless, of course, the situation is different with "local" channels). How embarrassing would it be for Verizon to have MSG-HD available to it but not have the necessary space?

Watch it, Verizon, don't wish for something or you just may get it!


robjlevin

join:2002-10-30
Millington, NJ

Finding room for MSG and MSG+ in HD is the last thing VZ is worried about. You can be sure those channels would be added in a heartbeat once they're made available.


nlk10010

join:2007-06-27
Great Neck, NY

Ah, so you're saying Verizon has space for new HD but it would only be made available for certain additions. OK, that seems odd but I don't know much about the situation, so I'll take your word for it. Thanks.



jetguy28

@verizon.net
reply to nlk10010

They have the room for those channels. Those channels have been left open for years. It would be 578-579-580-581, They fought this fight for so long why would you think that Verizon would not be in a rush to add MSG? They carry 4 NY sports teams.


JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4

I agree that they should have room for MSG HD - but not for the reason you state. Channel slots are not the same as QAM slots. The question is whether they have the QAM space left in the NY market to add these channels? I think they probably reserved that space, but you can't base that on channel positions.