32 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for October 20, 2013
====== 32 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using any name or email address
included herein for any reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to that person, or email address
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. - Geoffrey Welsh
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:27:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Neal McLain <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Another retransmission consent-fight: Dish Network v. Media General Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> | Dish Network asks FCC to intervene in Media General blackout | By Steve Donohue, FierceCable, October 18, 2013 | | ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Today, DISH Network L.L.C. | filed a complaint against Media General, requesting that the | Federal Communications Commission immediately require Media | General to negotiate in good faith to resolve a blackout that | began Oct. 1. | | In the Complaint, DISH explains how Media General has breached | its statutory duty to negotiate in good faith: "Media | General's conduct violates the Commission's rules requiring | good faith negotiation for retransmission consent rights, | because, among other things, Media General failed to respond | for 11 days to DISH's last pre-blackout offer." | | Media General blocked programming from DISH customers in 17 | markets after a retransmission contract expired. | | "DISH customers and Media General viewers were without their | shows and events for 11 days before Media General would even | contact us," said Dave Shull, DISH executive vice president. | "We reacted with a counter offer within hours and Media | General has yet to respond. DISH is asking the FCC to act | expeditiously to address Media General's bad faith, push them | back to the negotiating table and submit to mediation to get | programming back to consumers." Continued: http://tinyurl.com/ljgnd53 Representative Eshoo's CHOICE Act addresses this problem, and it seems to be gathering support. Maybe there's a chance that it will actually make it through Congress http://tinyurl.com/l53hsj7 Neal McLain
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 07:13:36 -0400 From: T <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: T-Mobile Hands Consumers a Pleasant Shocker Message-ID: <MPG.email@example.com> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net says... > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:14:17 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > > > T-Mobile Hands Consumers a Pleasant Shocker > > ... > > ... on Wednesday, T-Mobile did it again. It announced an even > > bigger shocker: Starting next month, it will eliminate the sky-high, > > nosebleed, ridiculous, usurious international roaming charges that > > have terrified and enraged overseas travelers for years. > > And do you suppose T-Mo will actually refund those nosebleed charges that > it bilked customers for back then, at least if they're still customers now? > > Cheers, -- tlvp Of course they won't. It's the game of the marketplace. Early adopters always pay through the nose, the next wave not so much and the mature wave little still. But a corporation will always get it's money.
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 22:29:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Neal McLain <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Canada to propose forcing a la carte programming Message-ID: <email@example.com> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 11:08:59 PM UTC-5, Garrett Wollman wrote: > On the margins, it [a la carte] may require (and free) distributors > to rearrange their bundles in a way that more closely matches the > services households actually want to buy together. Agreed! I'd like to see legislation that would:  Prohibit broadcast licensees from bundling non-broadcast programming with broadcast signals in retransmission-consent agreements.  Define some ironclad procedure for resolving transmission-consent squabbles. It could be binding arbitration, an FCC hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, or maybe a special court.  Grant cable (and satellite) companies the freedom to split the basic tier into three tiers: --- Sports. --- Broadcast stations that elect retransmission consent. --- Everything else including broadcast stations that elect must-carry. This would move the most expensive programming onto separate tiers. As it happens, Representative Anna G. Eshoo (D-California), has introduced a bill called The Video CHOICE (Consumers Have Options in Choosing Entertainment. It would accomplish most of what I propose; specifically: - Prohibit broadcast licensees from bundling non-broadcast programming with broadcast signals. - Grant cable companies the freedom to set up a "retransmission consent service tier." - Require the FCC to study sports programming license fees and issue a report to Congress. The text of Eshoo's bill is here: http://tinyurl.com/nx243u6 Neal McLain
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:03:40 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Canada to propose forcing a la carte programming Message-ID: <20131019160339.GA32070@telecom.csail.mit.edu> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:29:05PM -0700, Neal McLain wrote: > On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 11:08:59 PM UTC-5, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > > On the margins, it [a la carte] may require (and free) distributors > > to rearrange their bundles in a way that more closely matches the > > services households actually want to buy together. > > Agreed! > > I'd like to see legislation that would: >  Prohibit broadcast licensees from ... Putting the bubble-headed bleached blond on at five. >  Define some ironclad procedure for ... Balancing the federal budget. >  Grant cable (and satellite) companies the freedom to ... Sell whatever they want to whomever wants to buy it: * Agence France-Presse * Al Jazeera * BBC * Freaky Alaskans on sleds with binoculars * NHK * Xinhua > As it happens, Representative Anna G. Eshoo (D-California), has > introduced a bill called ... "The Free Publicity For Anna Act"? Sigh. No offense, man, but isn't this all a side show to the gritty business of actually governing? The U.S. is in desperate trouble, economically, culturally, and morally, and I don't think our public debates need to focus on which flavor of goatse you or I rent. The government's job is not to protect us from our own folly. The government's job is to protect us from our neighbor's folly. We have, and need to exercise, the option of turning the set off and going to talk to our neighbors: about politics, the deficit, how schools are failing at every level, our kids, the "ancient political fish-like smell", or whatever the topic of the day is. When enough viewers do *that*, the cable companies will change their programming to give viewers more, and "better", choices. Bill -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly) Now the warriors of winter they gave a cold triumphant shout And all that stays is dying, all that lives is getting out - Joni Mitchell
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright (C) 2013 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.