[opendtv] Re: Wright Issues Call To Copyright Action
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 09:28:32 -0400
At 7:23 PM -0800 11/1/04, Dale Kelly wrote:
>Political/economic interests impact most business to some extent, especially
>when conducting government regulated enterprise. This doesn't mean that
>other significant circumstances are not in play - which they clearly are in
>the DTV transition. One can as easily make the argument that CE members are
>partially responsible for the current DTV malaise due to the these companies
>continuing to push non DTV product and poorly functioning DTV product, while
>failing to advise customers of such products near term obsolescence or it's
>known operational deficiencies. To some extent this is understandable since
>the companies might have suffered significant loss of sales had they done
>so. This being the case, is it reasonable to demand that broadcasters do
>more than they've currently done* to hasten the DTV transition when faced
>with a crippling business loss for doing so?
If you were to go back and look at the stuff I wrote about the DTV
transition between 1992 and 1997, I think you would find volumes of
content that are critical of the tactics of the CE industry in
setting the US DTV standard, and in their subsequent efforts to
promote DVD and DBS as the logical sources of HD content rather than
DTV broadcasts.
As for the lack of effort on the part of broadcasters, I cannot shed
any tears. it is completely obvious that this entire process has been
about obfuscation and delay, NOT building a better TV distribution
infrastructure.
So sorry that you had to spend a few million to protect a franchise
with an ongoing cash flow measured in tens of billions.
So sorry that the DBS and cable industries have spent ten times as
much as broadcasters to help transition their subscribers to digital
TV.
Let's keep in mind that you have been milking a valuable franchise
for more than five decades. Let's keep in mind that the primary
content providers to TV stations have used regulation and billions in
campaign contributions over the years, to regain control over 90% of
the content that the American Public watches.
And let's keep in mind that the quid pro guofo0r the DTV transition
was not to ENHANCE your franchise, but to force you to start using
the spectrum in a more responsible fashion. All I can say is SHAME ON
YOU for allowing the CE industry to back you into a corner with a
standard that didn't work, for DTV receivers that hardly anyone
want's to buy.
There may not be a marketplace when it comes to the distribution of
TV content, but there IS a marketplace for the products that
consumers buy to keep themselves entertained. Do not blame the CE
industry for your current predicament - you (BROADCASTER'S) allowed
this to happen, because you were more concerned about protecting the
NTSC franchise than building a new infrastructure that can compete
with cable and DBS.
>* = Broadcasters invested many $ millions constructing and operating DTV
>facilities even though there was no near term hope of a consumer demand for
>this service and where reception was clearly problematic. Should reception
>and other problems have been resolved, there was still no way of gaining the
>needed ratings attribution for those homes viewing DTV services, which is
>critical to the broadcasters sales effort (it is a business after all).
>Fortunately such dynamics are improving, which will speed the transition
>based upon a more reasonable deadline.
As I said above. You got what you asked for. Sadly, I spent years
working in the DTV standards process. I almost never saw a
representative of a call letter station at these meetings. You
abdicated your responsibility to the NAB, the networks, and the CE
industry.
>I was likely incorrect when suggesting that you're strident anti broadcast
>position is due to a CEA bias on your part. After all of these years I
>should know to never to attribute such actions to skullduggery when a simple
>ignorance of the fact is a more likely possibility.
I am an equal opportunity abuser. And an equal opportunity promoter.
If I perceive that the action of ANY party interested in this debate
is motivated by protectionism and greed, I attack. And if I see ANY
party do something positive to move things along, I say that too.
All of this being said, I do feel some pain and compassion for the
plight that broadcasters now find themselves in. I have invested a
considerable portion of my career in broadcasting, both from the
operational side, and in terms of developing the tools that you use
to create and deliver content to the masses. My motivation has not
been to tear down broadcasting, but rather, to revitalize it. But
this has proven to be nearly impossible because of the political and
economic gerrymandering.
When we can finally agree that what we are doing today is NOT
WORKING, THEN we may be able to make some real progress.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
