WASHINGTON—The NextGen TV transition could be “stranded indefinitely in a regime of regulatory uncertainty and half-measures” without 3.0 tuner mandates, must carry provisions and a sunset date for 1.0 broadcasts, the NAB has told the Federal Communications Commission.

The reply comments by the NAB were made in an ongoing proceeding by the FCC to assess and develop a regulatory framework for the rollout of NextGen TV. That proceeding has produced wide ranging arguments about tuner mandates, must carry provisions, digital rights management and sunset dates for the current ATSC 1.0 broadcasts.

“The record developed here confirms that the Commission’s central task is no longer to debate whether NextGen TV is worth pursuing – stakeholders across the ecosystem recognize that it is – but to decide whether the transition will be allowed to succeed through an orderly, coordinated framework, or instead be stranded indefinitely in a regime of regulatory uncertainty and half-measures, all to the detriment of the viewing public,” the NAB said.

The creation of an “orderly, coordinated framework,” the group added, will require four “core actions” that the FCC needs to adopt if the transition is going to be successful and provide consumers with continued access to free, over-the-air broadcasting.

The four areas are: “(1) establish clear, date-certain sunsets for ATSC 1.0 that provide the focal point necessary for marketplace coordination; (2) modernize the receiver standard so consumers can continue to access broadcast service reliably and consistently as the transition proceeds; (3) ensure continued MVPD carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals and associated advanced features so viewers are not deprived of NextGen TV capabilities through distribution bottlenecks; and (4) protect broadcasters’ ability to deliver high-value programming in a video marketplace where content protection and modern technical capabilities are increasingly prerequisites to obtaining and sustaining premium content.”

The NAB also stressed that “the record also makes plain that the Commission has broad support for taking these steps now. Broadcasters, technology providers, and public-interest stakeholders converge on a simple reality: a voluntary framework has reached the limits of what it can accomplish, and further progress depends on regulatory certainty and coordinated action.”

“Against that record of support, opponents’ submissions are notable for what they do not provide: a workable alternative path to completing the transition,” the NAB added. “Instead, the principal opponents offer a familiar mix of classic delay advocacy: resisting receiver modernization, resisting regulatory certainty, resisting any step that would move the transition from pilot to scale, all while recasting the Further Notice as a forum for collateral disputes and speculative anxieties. In short, these opponents reject any modernization that would impose even minimal effort or adjustment on their part. That is not a serious transition plan. In reality, it is an effort to keep free, over-the-air broadcasting tethered to legacy constraints while other segments of the video marketplace move forward unencumbered and without having to worry about broadcasting as a viable competitor.”

“[T]he Commission should establish a firm sunset for ATSC 1.0, eliminate the regulatory constraints that indefinitely prolong simulcasting and “substantially similar” operation, and modernize the receiver framework so that consumers can continue to access free, over-the-air broadcasting reliably as the transition proceeds,” the NAB concluded. “The Commission should also reject efforts to derail this proceeding with collateral disputes and overstated legal theories that offer no workable alternative transition plan.”

The full filing is available here.

WASHINGTON—Associations backed by the pay TV industry have voiced significant opposition to the NAB’s proposals for speeding up the transition to NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0.

In filing with the Federal Communications Commission, which has launched an inquiry into rules impacting the rollout of ATSC 3.0 broadcasts [FCC GN Docket No. 16-142 Authorizing Permissive Use of the “Next Generation” Broadcast Television Standard], the NCTA, the American Television Alliance (ATVA) and others have criticized NAB proposals that the FCC should set a firm cutoff date for ATSC 1.0 broadcasts and eliminate requirements to simulcast 1.0 content on the newer 3.0 broadcasts.

In its Jan. 20 filing, the NCTA. which represents major cable providers told the FCC that the transition “to ATSC 3.0 should remain market based, and the Commission should reject broadcasters’ requests for government intervention. Instead, the government should continue to prioritize protecting consumers from any harmful impacts.”

More specifically, the NCTA comments argued that “the simulcasting requirements in the Commission’s rules remain essential at this point in the transition given the broadcast industry’s decision to use a non-backwards compatible technology. The Commission should not foist the substantial costs of a premature conversion to ATSC 3.0 on consumers and MVPDs by abandoning the simulcasting and substantially similar protections at this time.”

Filings by the NAB, Pearl TV and other broadcasters have pushed for the end of simulcasting rules because it would free-up spectrum and allow them to better showcase the benefits of the new 3.0 broadcast standard.

The NCTA also argued that the FCC “should also reject any calls to grant must-carry rights to 3.0 signals. In today’s video marketplace, must carry requirements are no longer supportable under the First and Fifth Amendments. Extending must carry requirements to 3.0 signals would only exacerbate these constitutional infirmities.”

The filing argued that “MVPD distribution of ATSC 3.0 signals also presents numerous technical challenges, including issues that implicate the Commission’s existing rules regarding broadcast must carry and retransmission consent. The Commission should remain mindful of these challenges as the transition progresses.”

In terms of must-carry for 3.0 broadcasts, the NCTA argued that “requiring cable operators to incur additional substantial costs to upgrade their equipment to meet new carriage obligations would have significant economic impacts on regulated cable operators and interfere with their investment-backed expectations. In today’s highly competitive marketplace for video, these burdens are more severe and represent a far greater economic impact on cable providers than was the case when courts have considered these issues in the past.”

The NCTA also contended that “The Commission should also ensure that broadcasters’ use of spectrum serves the public interest and meets statutory requirements concerning ancillary and supplementary services, and it should take steps to contain any anti-competitive effects stemming from broadcast stations’ transition to ATSC 3.0.”

The NCTA warned that implementation of the broadcast standard posed a number of anti-competitive threats to the video market and argued that the FCC should adopt policies that would avoid those problems.

“If the Commission decides to permit stations to flash cut to ATSC 3.0 despite the early state of the transition and lack of demand from consumers, it should take additional steps to limit and contain the inevitable anti-competitive effects and harm to MVPDs and consumers,” the NCTA argued.

“The Commission should affirmatively require that patents relevant to the ATSC 3.0 standard be licensed on a reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) basis,” the NCTA urged. “Of significant concern, there has already been patent infringement litigation involving alleged ATSC 3.0 functionality where the jury awarded the patentee an ongoing royalty of $6.75 per television for four patents, exorbitantly higher than the rates for the two existing patent pools for ATSC 3.0 patents.

"Specifically, a pool comprising over 11,000 patents operated by Avanci charges $2-$3 per unit, and a pool of 50+ patents administered by Via Licensing Alliance similarly charges under $3 per unit. Constellation’s excessive royalty award prompted LG to suspend inclusion of ATSC 3.0-compatibility in its TVs for the U.S. market. This type of `patent ambush’ is particularly worrying given that many patents in the field claim patent-ineligible subject matter (as LG is arguing in the pending litigation), but it can take years of litigation to invalidate such patents.”

In its filings, the American Television Alliance also argued that the transition posed significant technical issues for pay TV operators and that they should not be required to invest significant amounts of money to comply with Must carry rules.

The ATVA said it “continues to be open to `voluntary and market-driven’ adoption of ATSC 3.0” and said the FCC should continue its “voluntary and market-driven” approach.

“From the MVPD perspective, the most significant concern about ATSC 3.0 is that the format is not backwards compatible with MVPDs’ existing distribution architecture, and many current set-top-boxes and consumer devices cannot support ATSC 3.0 streams and related features,” it stressed. “Developing ATSC 3.0 compatibility would require MVPDs to incur substantial costs for new equipment and system changes to receive and process ATSC 3.0 signals. Even then, most MVPDs could not deliver ATSC 3.0 signals to consumers. In other words, whatever improvements broadcasters might make to their signals using ATSC 3.0 are highly unlikely ever to accrue to MVPD subscribers and thus MVPD expenditures to accommodate ATSC 3.0 would be a dead weight loss.”

“We, therefore, urge the Commission to maintain the simulcasting requirement (and the substantially similar requirement),” the group concluded. “If the Commission were to decide otherwise, however, it should at a minimum require broadcasters—whether electing retransmission consent or must-carry—to deliver signals to MVPDs in a 1.0-compatible format at their cost. Otherwise, the Commission would be asking MVPDs (and their subscribers) to incur substantial costs to downconvert broadcast signals without any benefit to those subscribers. This would be arbitrary and capricious.”

The group also contended that “the primary benefits of the ATSC 3.0 transition appear not to be improvements to broadcast television, but rather the ability of broadcasters to use ATSC 3.0 signals for unrelated services like datacasting. This real possibility that broadcasters could use the vast majority of their spectrum for services other than free, over-the-air television raises significant legal questions, including under the Communications Act, FCC rules, and the Administrative Procedure Act—especially if MVPDs and their subscribers are expected to pick up the tab for such services.”

The full filing by the NCTA is available here.

The full filing by the ATVA is available here.

[This article is part TV Tech’s ongoing coverage of the FCC and NextGen TV; articles about the comments and filings from other companies and associations with different perspectives on these issues can be found here and here.]

WASHINGTON—Public broadcasters are urging the FCC to consider its unique position in the U.S. broadcasting environment when it comes to using DMA data to determine “must carry” status, warning the commission that the consolidation of cable headends is threatening public broadcasters’ obligations to serve the viewing public. 

In comments filed with the FCC this week, America’s Public Television Stations (APTS) and PBS filed reply comments in connection with the commission’s consideration of new rules in determining a television station’s designated market area (DMA).

Noncommercial TV stations can qualify for must-carry status if the MVPD’s headend is within the station’s contour or located within 50 miles of the station’s community of license “reference point.” Because of their unique requirements to provide statewide coverage, some public broadcast stations are often purposefully sited in counties far from any other broadcasters (that happen to be at the edges of DMAs) in order to ensure over-the-air service to all viewers throughout the state.

Since the Cable Act of 1992, technology advances have allowed cable operators to carry many more signals per headend, allowing them to consolidate into fewer headends. This can harm the ability of public broadcasters to maintain must-carry status, the groups told the FCC.

“Cable operators today can serve far more systems from a single headend than in 1992. While headend consolidation may well result in cost efficiencies for cable operators, it can disrupt long-stable viewer access to noncommercial stations when a headend is moved to a location beyond a station’s contour and more than 50 miles from its community of license reference point (i.e., a location with respect to which the station may no longer qualify for “must carry”). This can result in cable subscribers losing access to their local public TV stations,” they told the commission.

APTS and PBS said numerous examples of this issue have popped up around the country, citing one example along the area where Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia border each other.  

“WNEO(TV), Alliance, Ohio (“WNEO”) provides PBS programming to viewers in northeastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, and northern West Virginia. Earlier this year, a cable operator informed WNEO that its signal would no longer be carried on four western Pennsylvania cable systems that had carried the station for decades because of ‘the consolidation of the cable systems’ headend operations’ into a headend located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 

“As a result of the change, the cable operator explained in a letter, ‘WNEO is no longer a ‘qualified local noncommercial educational television station’ with respect to each of these cable systems.’ The cable operator noted that these ‘operational changes’ were made ‘to better serve [its] subscribers in the Pittsburgh Designated Market Area.’ As a result of these changes (which were solely within the cable operator’s control), WNEO can no longer rely on carriage on cable systems serving approximately 22,000 viewers who live within its over-the-air service contour,” they said in their filing. 

The groups also told the commission that because of rule changes imposed in 2019, public broadcast licensees are no longer required to elect carriage on DBS providers on a triennial basis; instead, carriage requests are considered “evergreen” once they are placed in a station’s online public inspection file and e-mailed to a DBS provider. 

Nevertheless, they said, triennial DMA information is relevant to noncommercial stations located in counties that may be reassigned to a different DMA from one carriage cycle to another. 

“Such stations would be entitled to seek DBS carriage in their new DMAs and, similarly, could lose carriage rights in their old DMAs upon the commencement of a new triennial cycle. Therefore, these stations currently must acquire DMA assignment data every three years in order to protect their statutory satellite carriage rights. PTV is presently exploring options for addressing this important issue so that public television stations in impacted counties can safeguard their scarce resources while serving their local communities.”

APTS and PBS offered three suggestions for the commission when considering new must carry rules for public broadcasters. 

“First, the Commission should recognize the significant burden of DMA changes imposed on noncommercial educational (NCE) stations. Second, the Commission should take note of the cumulative impact that Multichannel Video Programming Distributor (MVPD) headend consolidation has had (and could continue to have) in reducing the public’s access to noncommercial educational stations. Third, the Commission should consider ways to encourage Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) carriage of statewide public television licensees throughout their entire state, including in “orphan” counties, because DBS operators have made little to no progress in public television statewide carriage in the past decade.”

WASHINGTON—LPTVs had the gate slammed in their faces by the FCC Media Bureau when it comes to any kind of must-carry rule of their stations on satellite providers, with WVUX-LD, a low power TV station in Fairmont, WVa., having both of its arguments for carriage rights denied.

WVUX-LD, through its owner and operator Michael Karr, filed a Petition for Declaratory Ruling regarding mandatory satellite carriage of a qualified LPTV and a Demand for Carriage against DirecTV and Dish, both of which refused to carry WVUX-LD in the Clarksburg-Weston Designated Market Area in West Virginia.

The FCC’s decision to deny both the complaint and petition from WVUX-LD is based on the Communications Act of 1934, saying that the LPTV is misunderstanding the law. While the Act does mandate coverage of TV broadcast stations that meet certain conditions, the FCC says it is “unambiguous that these carriage rights are not available to LPTV stations.” Section 338 of the law reads, “[n]o lower power television station … shall be entitled to insist on carriage under this section.”

The Act does say that certain LPTV stations can become qualified for must-carry rules, which WVUX-LD says it is. The station also argued that there is no legitimate reason that cable providers and satellite carriers should be treated differently when it comes to carriage obligations, especially in an area like the one it covers, where a lack of full-power TV stations create limited options for customers.

However, the FCC determined that “WVUX-LD’s status as an LPTV is fatal to its request for satellite mandatory carriage.”

“Moreover, WVUX-LD’s emphasis on being a qualified LPTV is meaningless because Congress has explicitly excluded LPTV stations from a satellite carrier’s mandatory carriage obligation.”

With the petition for a Declaratory Ruling to amend the law, the FCC says because of the unambiguousness of the Communications Act, it cannot grant a declaratory ruling that conflicts with it.

The FCC’s full decision is available here.

NEW YORK—As the AT&T-Nexstar dispute continues into its third week, CBS is warning its viewers that it could be the next broadcaster in the DirecTV owner’s crosshairs.

On July 3, more than 120 Nexstar Media Group TV stations went dark for AT&T/DirecTV customers throughout the country as a result of failed retransmission negotiations. Stations in 97 markets were impacted by the blackout and the impasse continues.

Now CBS claims AT&T is not proposing a “fair market value agreement” to continue carrying its TV stations and says that CBS-owned stations in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas, San Francisco, Boston, Atlanta, Tampa, Seattle, Detroit, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Sacramento, Pittsburgh and Baltimore could be pulled at 11:00 PM, PT on July 19. DirecTV NOW customers nationwide would lose the CBS Television Network’s hit programming as well.

“CBS has reached timely, fair agreements with hundreds of other cable, satellite, telco and internet providers to carry our industry-leading, fan-favorite programming,” the network said in a statement. “AT&T, however, continues to propose unfair terms well below those agreed to by its competitors and may drop CBS unless we agree to those terms.”

“CBS would like to avoid being dropped, but unless an agreement is reached, our viewers should be prepared,” the statement said, adding that “AT&T’s willingness to deprive its customers of valuable content has become routine over the last few weeks and months.”

AT&T responded by saying that “Broadcast stations are the incumbents to our industry, and many feel they deserve certain entitlements. They continue to give their signals away for free but also demand unsustainably growing fees for allowing customers the convenience of receiving their channels in a usual program guide or without switching an input.”

AT&T also accused broadcasters of failing to “evolve” in the new media landscape.

“The best producers have moved aggressively into the multichannel environment and streaming to escape broadcast network and local station restrictions,” AT&T said. “And even programmers like CBS are moving their most anticipated content off the national broadcast channel and into other alternatives.

“The talent goes elsewhere, the audiences follow, and yet stations refuse to evolve, shutting off the same communities they are licensed to serve. This year, broadcasters have caused more than 200 blackouts industry-wide, which is on a record one-year pace. That’s already a more than 20 percent jump over the 165 in 2018.”

The company also called for new regulations.

“There are ways to try to eliminate these blackouts, including new legislation, and fortunately Congress has taken more interest. But the best option is to create mutually beneficial relationships with broadcasters like CBS and Nexstar through good faith negotiations.”

WASHINGTON—Did the FCC just grant must-carry status to all class A's and LPTV's, potentially filling cable lineups with hundreds if not thousands of channels they would have to carry at a time when cable ops argue such capacity is at a premium.

Well, no, but the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition had a little fun with the premise Monday, given the April 1 date.

"FCC GRANTS IMMEDIATE AND TOTAL MVPD MUST CARRY STATUS TO ALL CLASS A's & LPTV," read the email alert's headline in huge red letters.

"Using a novel and never used before free market emergency decree from the original 1932 Communications Act," said the coalition, "the FCC commissioners bypass the intent of Congress to level the next gen TV landscape."

"The low power industry applauds this historic and bold move," said Coalition director Mike Gravino, tongue planted firmly in cheek. Soon 1000's of local stations and their many 1000s of digi-net sub-channels will be able to force their way onto both large and small cable systems and all DBS providers. And finally, all FCC licensed TV broadcasters will be treated equally, fairly, and all share in the corporate welfare of the state."

Actually, the coalition wouldn't mind a little of the corporate largess in the form of ad dollars going to "real small businesses," if it were more than just an April Fool's wish. "Oh, well, at least we can dream about it," said Gravino.

WASHINGTON--Noncommercial educational (NCE) TV stations want the FCC to end the mandatory three-year satellite election of most-carry status by noncommercial TV stations, saying it is both unnecessary and that DBS providers have used it as a loophole through which to drop carriage.

That came in comments to the FCC on its ongoing effort to modernize media regs.

In those comments, PBS, NPR, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and America's Public Television Stations said that given that noncommercial TV stations can't, unlike commercial stations, elect retransmission consent--and obviously want DirecTV and Dish to carry them--the election is simply a rote process.

They point out that there is no similar three-year election for cable carriage, which simply continues indefinitely unless there is a change in circumstance that modifies the must-carry agreement.

"The DBS rules should be aligned with the cable rules to permit a one-time election that continues for as long as the station remains qualified for carriage," they said.

In addition, they argue that, in at least a "handful of cases, each three-year cycle, the requirements "turn out to be a trap for the unwary NCE-TV station, resulting in the loss of DBS carriage in the station’s market for the next three years."

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) Monday (July 23) launched another effort at massive communications deregulation, one he has been pushing for most of a decade, so far without success.

Scalise has reintroduced a discussion draft of his Next Generation Television Marketplace Act, which repeals must-carry and retransmission consent rules and the compulsory license. That is the license that allows broadcasters to include nonlocal programming in their retrans deals without having to secure individual rights from national network and syndication rightsholders.

The bill would also "eliminate the government's role in defining the scope of programming exclusivity" and "codify the repeal of certain limitations imposed on local broadcasters that prevent them from adapting to today’s dynamic communications marketplace."

Like previous incarnations, the bill also includes eliminating the network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity rules, as well as broadcast ownership limits.

[Read: Retransmission Overhaul Launched]

“Innovation tends to follow the path of least government resistance. For proof, look no further than the growth of online streaming services that are operating in a completely free market, while competing against other platforms that are regulated as if they were still monopolies from the 1990s," said Scalise. "My legislation will level the playing field so consumers can benefit from even more freedom in the video marketplace.”

Broadcasters wouldn't mind getting rid of more ownership restrictions, but getting rid of must-carry and retrans and network nondupe and exclusivity rules are nonstarters. The National Association of Broadcasters will strongly oppose the bill, according to an NAB spokesperson, as it has previous versions.

“Today’s media marketplace has never been more robust, with consumer access to broadcast programming on more platforms than at any time in history," said NAB EVP Dennis Wharton. "Unfortunately, the Next Generation Television Marketplace Act would undermine this great American success story. It would severely damage broadcasters’ ability to serve local communities and hurt tens of millions of viewers who rely every day on broadcast TV for news, entertainment and lifeline weather coverage."

But the bill has plenty of supporters.

"As the former president of an association of local TV stations, former president of network distribution for Fox, former president of the ABC Television Network, former executive VP of The Walt Disney Company and a former law professor, I write to strongly support House Majority Whip Steve Scalise’s Bill, The Next Generation Television Act," blogged Preston Padden, whose resume includes expert witness on the Hill for why the compulsory license should go.

"His Bill would repeal a steaming pile of outdated, conflicting and unnecessary government interventions into the market for distributing television programming," said Padden.

"The bill would at long last eliminate or substantially curtail legacy video regulations based on perceptions of the market in the early 1990s, or even earlier," said Free State Foundation President Randolph May. "If adopted, the NextGen TV Act would bolster free market competition and free speech in the video services market."

“The American Television Alliance, a voice for the TV viewer, commends Congressman Steve Scalise for his thoughtful leadership to reform and update America’s broken and outdated video laws," said the American Television Alliance, which has been advocating for major retrans reform in the face of what it says are skyrocketing broadcaster fee asks and blackouts. “The Next Generation Television Marketplace Act will jump-start and elevate a long-overdue conversation about modernizing the rules of the road for how Americans access and pay for video content. The legislation is forward-thinking, free-market oriented and pro-consumer."

"ACA applauds Rep. Scalise for introducing legislation designed to overhaul archaic media laws and policies," said ACA President Matt Polka. "The Scalise bill, to its credit, will prompt lawmakers and stakeholders to begin important conversations that should result in legislation next year that will truly serve the public interest."

“The regulations used to govern the video marketplace are out of date and no longer reflect the options and ways consumers obtain and view their content," said Verizon SVP Robert Fisher. "Congress should consider the changing technology enabled by a growing internet ecosystem as they create a new video marketplace framework....This legislation will begin the conversation to modernize our nation’s video policies as the marketplace responds to rapidly changing consumer demands.”

“Dish commends Rep. Scalise for his continued leadership on behalf of consumers," said Dish SVP Jeff Blum. "The broken retransmission consent regime is in dire need of comprehensive reform, and customers have been left paying the price through broadcaster blackouts and skyrocketing retransmission consent rates.”

“NTCA appreciates Congressman Scalise’s willingness to take on the difficult issue of updating video policy by introducing this legislation," said Shirley Bloomfield, CEO of NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association. "As consumer consumption of video continues to evolve, it is essential to examine video marketplace failures and consider updates to existing laws and regulations, especially in rural areas where many residents can’t receive broadcast signals. We look forward to engaging in this important discussion with Congress, and ultimately to the passage of legislation that will address the critical shortcomings in the existing rules governing this marketplace.”

“Charter applauds Majority Whip Steve Scalise for reintroducing the Next Generation Television Marketplace Act," the company said in a statement. "Congressman Scalise is rightly reexamining a broken system that has resulted in retransmission consent fees rising exponentially over the last decade. We look forward to working with him and his colleagues in Congress to reform the outdated rules and better protect consumers.”

WASHINGTON—Small cable operators want to know how they would fit into the proposed voluntary ATSC 3.0 adoption scheme. The American Cable Association filed comments on the Federal Communications Commission’s recent proposal to allow broadcasters to voluntarily deploy ATSC 3.0, also referred to as the “next-generation” form of signal transition.

“Capacity-constrained MVPDs will face unique burdens associated with the transition, particularly if forced to carry higher resolution ATSC 3.0 signal,” the ACA said.

The FCC published its related Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Feb. 2, acting on a petition by broadcast and consumer equipment lobbies to authorize voluntary adoption of ATSC 3.0, a multifaceted suite of technology standards that will propel broadcast TV into the Internet Age. The NPRM seeks feedback on how to incorporate ATSC 3.0into the post-auction channel repack on track to commence this spring. The NPRM also seeks comment on which elements of the standard to authorize, as well as how to handle simulcasting, interference, public interest obligations, must-carry and retransmission consent.

The ACA suggested adding a few questions about the impact on its members—smaller and rural multichannel video programming distributors, or MVPDs, e.g.:

“ We seek comment on whether small, rural, and capacity-constrained MVPDs would face unique circumstances with regard to the voluntary provision of ATSC 3.0 that we should consider in this proceeding.... Hundreds of small MVPDs will be renegotiating thousands of separate retransmission consent agreements by the end of this year. Should the commission address circumstances where a broadcaster conditions carriage of a 1.0 signal on carriage of a 3.0 signal while the NPRM is pending?

The ACA further suggests the commission should seek comment on how its members are supposed to receive ATSC 3.0 since the technology for them to do so is not yet available, and who will pay for the necessary upgrade. “Will these MVPDs also face particular difficulty in assuming the costs to deliver ATSC 3.0 signals to their customers, such as costs associated with new receivers and other headend equipment,” the filing said.

The NPRM is on the commission’s Feb. 23 agenda for vote but has not yet been published in the Federal Registers, which in turn will trigger a 60-day comment cycle and a subsequent 30-day reply cycle.

Also see…
Feb. 2, 2017
“FCC@3.0: OET-69, Public Interest, Yes; Tuner Edict, No”
A February vote would roughly coincide with the end of the TV spectrum incentive auction, which starts the 39-month deadline clock for stations moving to new channel assignments. The NPRM seeks feedback on how to incorporate ATSC 3.0 into this post-auction channel repack.

Feb. 2, 2017
“FCC Proposes ATSC 3.0 Deployment”
A plan for voluntary adoption the “next-generation” television broadcasting transmission standard known as ATSC 3.0 has been proposed at the FCC, which represents a seminal event in the development of the standard. 

For more TV Technology coverage, check our ATSC 3.0 silo.