[opendtv] Re: Commissioner Copps on the Fox vs Cablevision dispute

  • From: Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 18:40:16 -0400

Craig Birkmaier wrote:
 
> NO. They are blocking Internet access for Cablevision broadband
> subscribers, many of which MAY NOT be cable subscribers.
 
Yes, I reread, and you appear to be right on this point. While I would not 
object at all if Fox took all of their shows off the Internet (it's up to them, 
since they own that content), I don't think it's fair to single out broadband 
users from one ISP. But if you read the article, it sounds like Fox will 
rethink all of its Internet offerings anyway. Almost like this is a harbinger.
 
BUT, the fact that ABC, CBS, and NBC might be blocking their content from 
Google (and therefore from Google TVs) is another matter entirely. That is 
certainly their right. As I said, over the Internet, these content owners have 
every right to allow access to their content on their own terms. If they don't 
want middlemen, they have every right to say no to that model. (When 
transmitting OTA, they have to deal with the national cap. Over the Internet, 
they have so similar restriction.)

> There is nothing walled about Google TV; unless you have some problem
> with a TV manufacturer integrating a computer that provides Internet
> access with the TV.
 
I have lots of problems with CE manufacturers colluding with only some web 
sites, to only allow access to those sites. Are you kidding? And yes, if Sony 
or any other manufacturer attempts these same tricks, I cannot fault the 
content owners for blocking their access. Sorry, Craig. The congloms are simply 
saying, we will provide the content over the Internet as WE see fit, and we 
won't be boxed in by CE companies and web sites colluding among themselves. We 
won't be coerced to make our content available to web sites that have 
exclusivity agreements with certain CE companies.
 
> Why should the congloms be allowed to block specific devices or
> services UNLESS they are RESELLING the content or blocking features
> like ads?
 
Because it's their content. They hold the cards. Just as you are NOT compelled 
by any third party to sell your microbrews on THEIR terms. If some retailer 
wants to sell your beer, along with his sideline of a female "escort service," 
for example, you are within your rights to refuse him your brew. It's so simple.
 
> So in essence you are saying that consumers SHOULD NOT support ANY
> effort to put the Internet on a TV?
 
You must be joking. You mean, put content on the Internet at any and all costs? 
Even if it means perverting the whole concept of the Internet? If a conglom has 
access to the Internet, and they do, then they should be able to decide how 
their content goes on this pipe. If middlemen want to force their presence into 
this distribution chain, for no reason that the conglom can discern, then the 
conglom must not cave in.
 
I would agree with your disdain if the networks were the one trying to build 
the walls. Instead, you have it backwards. In general, they are preventing 
their content from being walled in, Craig. (Except Fox and Cablevision 
broadband users.)
 
Bert
                                           
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: