[opendtv] Re: More on Verizon & Google

  • From: Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 19:47:07 -0400

Craig Birkmaier wrote:
 
> I would point out however, that it was never intended that
> broadcasters would be the owners of the spectrum. It belongs to
> people, not the government nor the public and corporate interests
> who are ALLOWED to use it for "the public good."
 
Of course. What I meant by "owners" was the public, and the public's intentions 
are SUPPOSED to be represented and voiced by Congress.
 
So, for example, Congress should be well aware of the advantages of having 
broadband deployed throughout the US, because we (i.e. individual constituents, 
businesses, academia) make it clear to them. And then Congress charges the FCC 
to make it happen. It is not the job of the FCC to hype up broadband TO US, 
even if it's probably fair for them to recommend approaches to achieve the 
goals.
 
> With respect to the development of the ATSC standard, however, the
> FCC did little to manage the process. Instead they let the special
> interests who would benefit from the new standard control the
> process, then mandated that the public buy receivers, even if they
> had no intention of using them.
 
There was no doubt some of that going on, e.g. wrt how the system with the most 
patents got selected. But I think you're being very selective when complaining 
about "special interests."
 
The receiver mandate IMO was one of Michael Powell's great achievements. As was 
the inclusion of MVPD subscribers within the 85 percent rule, to finally allow 
the transition to end. This was a way to finally have access to the 700 MHz 
band, and to do so in a way that benefitted TV consumers at the same time.
 
If there's anything that went wrong with this plan, it was that special 
interests, i.e. the MVPDs, did all they could to PREVENT the incorporation of a 
complete cable/DBS receiver. Specifically because it was in their best interest 
(and not the consumers' best interest) to rent out their own proprietary and 
incompatible boxes, so the MVPD subscribers could pay the price of the box many 
times over, as a steady revenue stream for the MVPD. Instead of once only, when 
buying the new TV set or the stand-alone STB.
 
So if you want to talk about special interests, you need look no further than 
that. Not to mention all the nonsensical hollering about how the built-in 
receiver would cost everyone more than $200 for something they wouldn't use. 
What was that, if not lies by the special interests to further their cause?
 
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: