A while back a startup company called Aereo tried to bring local programming to Americans via OTT (iptv). The programmers responded with a barrage of lawsuits that bankrupted them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo
When it comes to Charlie Ergen's Sling TV, these same programmers bend over backwards to accomodate this crooked media mogul:
http://cordcuttersnews.com/sling-tv-is- ... ew-device/
Naaah...the game ain't rigged.
The Programmers' Conspiracy Continues
Re: The Programmers' Conspiracy Continues
What I believe is missing here is recognizing the difference between two business models.
Aero was offering a subscription service to local OTA broadcasts without contact or payment to the content provider. I was very interested in the service, hoped the service would become available to my location and did a lot of reading on the technology. The main issues that I saw was that the programming was received at a remote location "leased" to the customer (in all reality the signal was not from a stubby in the unit, but rather from a shared antenna farm) and distributed without contract via IP providers. In many locations, it was documented the the OTA signal would not have been able to be received at the customer's location even with appropriate and reasonable antenna placement. Areo likely would have had a better road to success had they first contracted with each content provider prior to entering a market and limited the delivery to customers within the DMA. I agree with the concept that the end user should have the freedom to view their own content from any location or on any device, but Aero's approach to providing content was questionable on many levels.
Sling TV and DirecTV Everywhere services have distribution agreements with the content providers and limit regional content to distribution to customers registered within the DMA. Adding another delivery method only required a modification to these existing content provider agreements and increased the number of viewers and profits for both the distributor and content providers. Having experience with working with local broadcasters in many communities when building small SMATV and MATV systems, I have every reason to expect that similar distribution agreements would be reached for most any distribution model.
I do take issue with advertisement supported broadcasters using public frequencies to double dip and negotiate for paid distribution. I understand that it cost money to distribute any content in a closed system, but the distribution of free broadcast content creates customers and puts more eyes on the advertising for the local broadcaster. Public broadcasters should be included at no cost as they are already locally funded and federally subsidized. If a subscription service chooses to distribute local OTA broadcasts within the DMA, they should be included at cost to the subscriber rather than be a profit center... that is another story...
Aero was offering a subscription service to local OTA broadcasts without contact or payment to the content provider. I was very interested in the service, hoped the service would become available to my location and did a lot of reading on the technology. The main issues that I saw was that the programming was received at a remote location "leased" to the customer (in all reality the signal was not from a stubby in the unit, but rather from a shared antenna farm) and distributed without contract via IP providers. In many locations, it was documented the the OTA signal would not have been able to be received at the customer's location even with appropriate and reasonable antenna placement. Areo likely would have had a better road to success had they first contracted with each content provider prior to entering a market and limited the delivery to customers within the DMA. I agree with the concept that the end user should have the freedom to view their own content from any location or on any device, but Aero's approach to providing content was questionable on many levels.
Sling TV and DirecTV Everywhere services have distribution agreements with the content providers and limit regional content to distribution to customers registered within the DMA. Adding another delivery method only required a modification to these existing content provider agreements and increased the number of viewers and profits for both the distributor and content providers. Having experience with working with local broadcasters in many communities when building small SMATV and MATV systems, I have every reason to expect that similar distribution agreements would be reached for most any distribution model.
I do take issue with advertisement supported broadcasters using public frequencies to double dip and negotiate for paid distribution. I understand that it cost money to distribute any content in a closed system, but the distribution of free broadcast content creates customers and puts more eyes on the advertising for the local broadcaster. Public broadcasters should be included at no cost as they are already locally funded and federally subsidized. If a subscription service chooses to distribute local OTA broadcasts within the DMA, they should be included at cost to the subscriber rather than be a profit center... that is another story...
Titanium - Brian Gohl
He who dies with the most toys... is dead. - unknown
He who dies with the most toys... is dead. - unknown
Re: The Programmers' Conspiracy Continues
As far as I know, most of the programmers said no to Aereo, which is why they went in the direction they did. If the programmers wanted to get onboard, the Aereo fiasco could have been settled out of court with an agreement to pay carriage fees and the service could have resumed.
-
- TVRO Guru
- Articles: 0
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 6:52 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: The Programmers' Conspiracy Continues
FuboTV is launching in 2017. As far as I know they aren't affiliated with Dish or Direct, so programmers are slowly starting to give us what we want: COMPETITION!
12' Cosmos Primestar (refurbished)36" SuperJack Actuator
Chaparral Corotor Feed (Norsat 8115, 4106A)
ZGemmaH7 UHD, OctagonSX88 HD, Edision UHD, DSR-6000, DSR-6050
Clarke Belt: 22W - 133W
Chaparral Corotor Feed (Norsat 8115, 4106A)
ZGemmaH7 UHD, OctagonSX88 HD, Edision UHD, DSR-6000, DSR-6050
Clarke Belt: 22W - 133W