Cable company claims that broadcasters negotiating retransmission consent...
Cable company claims that broadcasters negotiating retransmission consent fees on behalf of multiple stations are driving up prices for consumers aren’t true, said the NAB in an ex parte letter filed with the FCC Wednesday. The letter is a response…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
to a series of American Cable Association filings attacking broadcasters for the practice. “Retransmission consent payments are not responsible for the high and rising consumer prices charged by cable operators” said the NAB, citing studies it said show that only two cents on the dollar of cable revenue go to retrans fees, while 20 cents go to other programming. “Government intervention to reduce the fees that MVPDs pay for local stations’ signals would only inflate MVPD profit margins,” said the NAB. The ACA did not comment. The American Television Alliance of which many operators are members said that retrans fees are estimated to rise to over $6 billion by 2018, from $1.24 billion in 2010. ATVA said the higher fees have led to an increase in blackouts, which it said went up 658 percent between 2010 and 2012. “So both blackouts and retransmission fees are skyrocketing,” the group said in a news release Thursday. “How do these trends in any way help television viewers?” Though the ACA had asked the FCC to prevent broadcasters from negotiating on behalf of several stations, the NAB said some cable operators have asked broadcasters to do so in the past, and that cable operators enjoy a bigger competitive advantage then broadcasters. “Undermining broadcasters’ statutory retransmission consent negotiation rights ultimately would reduce the quality and diversity of broadcast programming,” said NAB. Meanwhile Thursday the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s denial of Nexstar’s request for a preliminary injunction and restraining order against Time Warner Cable over TWC’s importing of distant signals from Nexstar, which the broadcaster said violates its retrans content agreement with TWC. “The district court correctly found Nexstar is not likely to succeed on the merits of its breach of contract or copyright claims,” said the 5th Circuit. “Thus, its denial of a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order was not an abuse of discretion.”