Re: 21bn to buy back spectrum from tv companies

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Bennett <richard () bennett com>
Date: December 22, 2009 10:35:25 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
Subject: Re: [IP] darn good question 21bn to buy back spectrum from tv companies

The most obvious way for this to play out is for cable operators to be required to offer a package of basic access to 
local channels for free to anyone in the area they serve. In return for that "public interest" obligation, the cable 
companies should be able to drop the local government and public access channels; the public should be able to get this 
stuff off the Internet anyway. Once TV has been completely moved to cable, the spectrum can be reassigned to mobile 
networks, who will use it to meet the demands of, you guessed it, video streaming. The mobile operators will have to 
pay a fee for this, in part to cover the costs of free cable, which they will gladly do as long as they can get some of 
the ad revenue from personalized advertising. Certain business entities will insist that all ad revenues belong to them 
rather than to the operators, and there will be a big fight in DC over the right to sell advertising, which is now 
known as "Internet Freedom." 

In the end, we will have over-the-air triple play, just as we have wireline triple play, probably with some fraction 
available for free or nearly free. On the other hand, we might just abandon to notion that we have a right to free OTA 
TV, and go the route of the UK, where everybody pays a license fee for each TV set; they use the money collected that 
way to pay for BBC, but we in the US would use it for some other purpose, like paying for health care. That may not be 
a bad thing.

RB 

On 12/22/2009 6:54 PM, David Farber wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Doug Humphrey <doug () joss com>
> Date: December 22, 2009 9:44:35 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: "ip" <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] 21bn to buy back spectrum from tv companies
>
> I don't understand why the government is paying to 
> get this spectrum "back".  I do not BELIEVE that this 
> was "purchased" by the TV industry (although I could 
> be incorrect on this).  I thought that it was being used 
> by the Broadcast industry for TV, under requirements 
> to provide "public services" as part of their operations, 
> and since they are no longer using it, the spectrum 
> should belong to the US Government to re-use in 
> whatever way they deem in the public interest.  Yes?
>
> doug
>
>
> On Dec 22, 2009, at 8:37 PM, Dave Farber wrote:
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > > From: Joly MacFie <joly () punkcast com>
> > > Date: December 22, 2009 7:55:40 PM EST
> > > To: Bruce Kushnick <oia () lists bway net>
> > > Subject: [OIA] 21bn to buy back spectrum from tv companies
> > >
> > > http://broadcastengineering.com/news/fcc-considers-tv-spectrum-1102/
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Joly MacFie  917 442 8665 Skype:punkcast
> > > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> > > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Open Infrastructure Alliance
> > > http://lists.bway.net/listinfo/oia
> > Archives      
>
>
> Archives      

-- 
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com