[mythtv-users] "Free Antenna TV" threat?

[Robert Houghton]

Eww.

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Tim Ashman <tim at ashmans.net> wrote:

> On Friday 22 January 2010 07:51:09 am Brian Wood wrote:
> > On Friday 22 January 2010 08:42:24 am Devin Heitmueller wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Colin McGregor <
> colin.mc151 at gmail.com>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > I am just north of the Canada-USA boarder, so, I admit that some of
> > > > the subtleties of US politics sometime escape me... So, could someone
> > > > explain to me a commercial that showed up LATE last evening on WGRZ
> > > > (Buffalo, NY) claiming that special interest groups were planning to
> > > > take away "Free Antenna TV", and the the viewers should contact
> > > > congress to stop this. The commercial was produced by the "National
> > > > Association of Broadcasters".
> > > >
> > > > I have real trouble seeing any government anywhere in the
> > > > industrialized world taking away over the air TV (would annoy too
> many
> > > > people). Further, the "National Association of Broadcasters" must
> have
> > > > some sort of agenda in all this, but at the moment I don't quite see
> > > > what it is.
> > > >
> > > > So, could someone explain to this Canadian what is REALLY going on
> > > > with this ad.?
> > >
> > > You can read the details in Ars Technica, but essentially the cell
> > > phone carriers are complaining that there is not enough spectrum to
> > > support all the users of newer smartphones like the iPhone, and they
> > > want the FCC to recover some of the spectrum that is currently
> > > allocated for digital TV and reallocate it for cell phone use.  The
> > > assertion is that this means "taking away over-the-air tv", which may
> > > or may not be valid depending on how much of the spectrum in your area
> > > is in use.
> > >
> > > It's also worth noting that the NAB is a trade association
> > > representing the companies that were given free licenses to use the
> > > spectrum for TV in the first place, so they have consider bias in the
> > > matter.
> >
> > The NAB's members are certainly not sterling here, they claim to operate
> in
> > the "public interest" (in fact, they are required by law to do so), while
> > they actually usurp a resource owned by "the people" for their private
> > benefit.
> >
> > The situation with available spectrum for cell phones might be helped
> > considerably if the US did not have several competing and incompatible
> > systems all operating in their own spectrum space, it's like building one
> > set of roads for Fords, another for GM products etc., you would quickly
> run
> > out of space to build roads, and your trade group would start lobbying to
> > have houses condemned for additional road space.
>
> This is exactly what I mean by the big business' in the US using congress
> to
> gain marketshare instead of innovation.  You are correct if they four
> companies would just give up on this idea of lock in by technology and just
> move to world gsm a whole bunch of spectrum would suddenly become available
> that they already have access too.
>
>
> >
> > > In reality, it is unlikely to happen.
>
> Unlike you I do believe that is our crazy pay for access world this does
> have
> a chance.
>
> tim
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20100122/3372a459/attachment.htm>