DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Communications Commission § 76.122

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Communications Commission § 76.122 Federal Communications Commission § 76.122 this Chapter for each named commu- tual provisions of the network-affiliate nity in that market. agreement, and as provided in § 76.124. (2) With respect to each syndicated (c) In order to exercise non-duplica- program, the zone of protection within tion rights pursuant to § 76.122, tele- which the television station is entitled vision stations shall notify each sat- to enforce syndicated exclusivity ellite carrier of the non-duplication rights shall be that geographic area sought in accordance with the require- agreed upon between the non-network ments of this section. Non-duplication program supplier, producer or dis- protection notices shall include the fol- tributor and the television station. In lowing information: no event shall such zone exceed the (1) The name and address of the party area within which the television sta- requesting non-duplication protection tion has acquired broadcast territorial and the television broadcast station exclusivity rights as defined in holding the non-duplication right; § 73.658(m) of this Chapter. To the ex- (2) Where the agreement between net- tent rights are obtained for any hy- work and affiliate so identifies, the phenated market named in § 76.51, such rights shall not exceed those permitted name of the program or series (includ- under § 73.658(m) of this chapter for ing specific episodes where necessary) each named community in that mar- for which protection is sought; ket. (3) The dates on which protection is (3) With respect to sports blackout, to begin and end; the zone of protection is the ‘‘specified (4) The name of the network (or net- zone’’ of a television broadcast station, works) which has (or have) extended as defined in § 76.5(e). If there is no tele- non-duplication protection to the vision station licensed to the commu- broadcaster; nity in which the sports event is tak- (5) The time periods by time of day ing place, the applicable specified zone (local time) and by network (if more shall be that of the television station than one) for each day of the week that licensed to the community with which the broadcaster will be broadcasting the sports event or team is identified, programs from that network (or net- or, if the event or local team is not works) and for which non-duplication identified with any particular commu- protection is requested; nity, the nearest community to which (6) The duration and extent (e.g., si- a television station is licensed. multaneous, same-day, seven-day, etc.) of the non-duplication protection § 76.122 Satellite network non-duplica- which has been agreed upon by the net- tion. work (or networks) and the broad- (a) Upon receiving notification pur- caster; and suant to paragraph (c) of this section, a (7) A list of the U.S. postal zip code(s) satellite carrier shall not deliver, to that encompass the zone of protection subscribers within zip code areas lo- under these rules. cated in whole or in part within the (d) Broadcasters entering into con- zone of protection of a commercial tel- tracts providing for network non-dupli- evision station licensed by the Com- cation protection shall notify affected mission, a program carried on a nation- satellite carriers within 60 calendar ally distributed superstation or on a station carried pursuant to § 76.54 of days of the signing of such a contract; this chapter when the network non-du- provided, however, that for such con- plication rights to such program are tracts signed before November 29, 2000, held by the commercial television sta- the broadcaster may provide notice on tion providing notice, except as pro- or before January 31, 2001, or with re- vided in paragraphs (j), (k) or (l) of this spect to pre-November 29, 2000 con- section. tracts that require amendment in order (b) Television broadcast station li- to invoke the provisions of these rules, censees shall be entitled to exercise notification may be given within sixty non-duplication rights pursuant to calendar days of the signing of such § 76.122 in accordance with the contrac- amendment. 593 VerDate Mar<15>2010 10:45 Nov 16, 2010 Jkt 220203 PO 00000 Frm 00603 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\SGML\220203.XXX 220203 WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with CFR § 76.122 47 CFR Ch. I (10–1–10 Edition) (e) Except as otherwise provided in (h) If a satellite carrier asks a na- this section, a broadcaster shall be en- tionally distributed superstation for titled to non-duplication protection be- information about its program sched- ginning on the later of: ule, the nationally distributed super- (1) The date specified in its notice to station shall answer the request: the satellite carrier; or (i) Within ten business days following (2) The first day of the calendar week its receipt of the request; or (Sunday through Saturday) that begins (ii) Sixty days before the program or 60 days after the satellite carrier re- programs mentioned in the request for ceives notice from the broadcaster; information will be broadcast, which- Provided, however, that with respect to ever comes later. notifications given pursuant to this (i) A broadcaster exercising exclu- section prior to June 1, 2001, a satellite sivity pursuant to this section shall carrier is not required to provide non- provide to the satellite carrier, upon duplication protection until 120 days request, an exact copy of those por- after the satellite carrier receives such tions of the contracts, such portions to notification. be signed by both the network and the (f) A broadcaster shall provide the broadcaster, setting forth in full the following information to the satellite provisions pertinent to the duration, carrier under the following cir- nature, and extent of the non-duplica- cumstances: tion terms concerning broadcast signal (1) In the event the protection speci- exhibition to which the parties have fied in the notices described in para- agreed. graph (c) of this section has been lim- ited or ended prior to the time speci- (j) A satellite carrier is not required fied in the notice, or in the event a to delete the duplicating programming time period, as identified to the sat- of any nationally distributed supersta- ellite carrier in a notice pursuant to tion that is carried by the satellite car- paragraph (c) of this section, for which rier as a local station pursuant to a broadcaster has obtained protection § 76.66 of this chapter or as a signifi- is shifted to another time of day or an- cantly viewed station pursuant to other day (but not expanded), the § 76.54 of this chapter broadcaster shall, as soon as possible, (1) Within the station’s local market; inform each satellite carrier that has (2) If the station is ‘‘significantly previously received the notice of all viewed,’’ pursuant to § 76.54 of this changes from the original notice. No- chapter, in zip code areas included tice to be furnished ‘‘as soon as pos- within the zone of protection unless a sible’’ under this paragraph shall be waiver of the significantly viewed ex- furnished by telephone, telegraph, fac- ception is granted pursuant to § 76.7 of simile, e-mail, overnight mail or other this chapter; or similar expedient means. (3) If the zone of protection falls, in (2) In the event the protection speci- whole or in part, within that signal’s fied in the notices described in para- grade B contour or noise limited serv- graph (c) of this section has been ex- ice contour. panded, the broadcaster shall, at least (k) A satellite carrier is not required 60 calendar days prior to broadcast of a to delete the duplicating programming protected program entitled to such ex- of any nationally distributed supersta- panded protection, notify each satellite tion from an individual subscriber who carrier that has previously received no- is located outside the zone of protec- tice of all changes from the original tion, notwithstanding that the sub- notice. scriber lives within a zip code provided (g) In determining which programs by the broadcaster pursuant to para- must be deleted from a television sig- graph (c) of this section. nal, a satellite carrier may rely on in- (l) A satellite carrier is not required formation from newspapers or maga- to delete programming if it has fewer zines of general circulation, the broad- than 1,000 subscribers within the rel- caster requesting exclusivity protec- evant protected zone who subscribe to tion, or the nationally distributed the nationally distributed superstation superstation. carrying the programming for which 594 VerDate Mar<15>2010 10:45 Nov 16, 2010 Jkt 220203 PO 00000 Frm 00604 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\SGML\220203.XXX 220203 WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with CFR Federal Communications Commission § 76.123 deletion is requested pursuant to para- (3)The dates on which exclusivity is graph (c) of this section. to begin and end; and [65 FR 68101, Nov. 14, 2000, as amended at 67 (4) A list of the U.S. postal zip code(s) FR 68951, Nov. 14, 2002; 70 FR 76530, Dec. 27, that encompass the zone of protection 2005] under these rules. (e) A distributor or television station § 76.123 Satellite syndicated program exercising exclusivity pursuant to this exclusivity. Section shall provide to the satellite (a) Upon receiving notification pur- carrier, upon request, an exact copy of suant to paragraph (d) of this section, those portions of the exclusivity con- a satellite carrier shall not deliver, to tracts, such portions to be signed by subscribers located within zip code both the distributor and the television areas in whole or in part within the station, setting forth in full the provi- zone of protection of a commercial tel- sions pertinent to the duration, nature, evision station licensed by the Com- and extent of the exclusivity terms mission, a program carried on a nation- concerning broadcast signal exhibition ally distributed superstation or on a to which the parties have agreed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Media Ownership Rules
    05-Sadler.qxd 2/3/2005 12:47 PM Page 101 5 MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES It is the purpose of this Act, among other things, to maintain control of the United States over all the channels of interstate and foreign radio transmission, and to provide for the use of such channels, but not the ownership thereof, by persons for limited periods of time, under licenses granted by Federal author- ity, and no such license shall be construed to create any right, beyond the terms, conditions, and periods of the license. —Section 301, Communications Act of 1934 he Communications Act of 1934 reestablished the point that the public airwaves were “scarce.” They were considered a limited and precious resource and T therefore would be subject to government rules and regulations. As the Supreme Court would state in 1943,“The radio spectrum simply is not large enough to accommodate everybody. There is a fixed natural limitation upon the number of stations that can operate without interfering with one another.”1 In reality, the airwaves are infinite, but the govern- ment has made a limited number of positions available for use. In the 1930s, the broadcast industry grew steadily, and the FCC had to grapple with the issue of broadcast station ownership. The FCC felt that a diversity of viewpoints on the airwaves served the public interest and was best achieved through diversity in station ownership. Therefore, to prevent individuals or companies from controlling too many broadcast stations in one area or across the country, the FCC eventually instituted ownership rules. These rules limit how many broadcast stations a person can own in a single market or nationwide.
    [Show full text]
  • The Clear Picture on Clear Channel Communications, Inc.: a Corporate Profile
    Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Articles and Chapters ILR Collection 1-28-2004 The Clear Picture on Clear Channel Communications, Inc.: A Corporate Profile Maria C. Figueroa Cornell University, [email protected] Damone Richardson Cornell University, [email protected] Pam Whitefield Cornell University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/articles Part of the Advertising and Promotion Management Commons, Arts Management Commons, and the Unions Commons Thank you for downloading an article from DigitalCommons@ILR. Support this valuable resource today! This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the ILR Collection at DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles and Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an alternate format, contact [email protected] for assistance. The Clear Picture on Clear Channel Communications, Inc.: A Corporate Profile Abstract [Excerpt] This research was commissioned by the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) with the expressed purpose of assisting the organization and its affiliate unions – which represent some 500,000 media and related workers – in understanding, more fully, the changes taking place in the arts and entertainment industry. Specifically, this report examines the impact that Clear Channel Communications, with its dominant positions in radio, live entertainment and outdoor advertising, has had on the industry in general, and workers in particular. Keywords AFL-CIO, media, worker, arts, entertainment industry, advertising, organization, union, marketplace, deregulation, federal regulators Disciplines Advertising and Promotion Management | Arts Management | Unions Comments Suggested Citation Figueroa, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Digital Television in Transition Between Japan and the U.S
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Kanayama, Tsutomu Conference Paper Broadcasting Policy and Regulation in transition before dawn of a New Paradigm: Comparing Digital Television in Transition between Japan and the U.S. 14th Asia-Pacific Regional Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS): "Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society", Kyoto, Japan, 24th-27th June, 2017 Provided in Cooperation with: International Telecommunications Society (ITS) Suggested Citation: Kanayama, Tsutomu (2017) : Broadcasting Policy and Regulation in transition before dawn of a New Paradigm: Comparing Digital Television in Transition between Japan and the U.S., 14th Asia-Pacific Regional Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS): "Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society", Kyoto, Japan, 24th-27th June, 2017, International Telecommunications Society (ITS), Calgary This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/168497 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich
    [Show full text]
  • Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed
    Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed A multimedia report on television newsrooms’ use of material provided by PR firms on behalf of paying clients Diane Farsetta and Daniel Price, Center for Media and Democracy April 6, 2006 Center for Media and Democracy 520 University Ave., Suite 227 Madison, WI 53703 Phone: 608-260-9713 Fax: 608-260-9714 Website: www.prwatch.org Contents News Release - 2 Executive Summary - 4 Introduction - 9 Findings: Video News Releases - 14 Findings: TV Stations - 19 Findings: Corporations - 22 Recommendations - 26 Take Action - 32 Frequently Asked Questions - 33 Appendix A: About This Report - 39 Appendix B: VNRs in Detail - 40 1 News Release Press Advisory: New Report: Fake TV News Widespread and Undisclosed Investigation catches 77 local TV stations presenting corporate PR as real news Groups file complaints urging FCC to take action against deceptive broadcasters WASHINGTON The Center for Media Democracy and Free Press today exposed an epidemic of fake news infiltrating local television broadcasts across country. At a press conference in Washington with FCC Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein, the groups called for a crackdown on stations that present corporate-sponsored videos as genuine news to an unsuspecting audience. CMD, which unveiled the results of a 10-month investigation, found scores of local stations slipping commercial “video news releases,” or VNRs, into their regular news programming. The new multimedia report released today includes footage of 36 separate VNRs and their broadcast as “news” by TV stations and networks nationwide, including those in the nation’s biggest markets. The full report -- “Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed” -- is now available complete with VNR and TV station video footage at www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 19-67 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter Of
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 19-67 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Children’s Television Programming Rules ) MB Docket No. 18-202 ) Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative ) MB Docket No. 17-105 REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING Adopted: July 10, 2019 Released: July 12, 2019 Comment Date: (30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register) Reply Comment Date: (60 days after date of publication in the Federal Register) By the Commission: Chairman Pai and Commissioners O’Rielly and Carr issuing separate statements; Commissioners Rosenworcel and Starks dissenting and issuing separate statements. TABLE OF CONTENTS Heading Paragraph # I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................................3 III. DISCUSSION........................................................................................................................................10 A. Statutory Authority .........................................................................................................................10 B. The Current State of the Marketplace for Children’s Programming ..............................................11 C. Core Programming..........................................................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • Dowlohnes Robert J
    DowLohnes Robert J. Folliard, III D 202.776.2357 E [email protected] January 6,2011 FILED/ACCEPTED VIA COURIER JAN-6 2011 Marlene H. Dortch, Esquire Federal Communications Commission Secretary Office of the Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554 Re: WBNG-TV, Binghamton, New York (Fac. Id. 23337) CBS Network Affiliation Agreement Dear Ms. Dortch: On behalf of WBNG License, Inc., licensee of WBNG-TV, Binghamton, New York, we hereby submit, in triplicate, a redacted copy of the network affiliation agreement between WBNG License, Inc. and CBS. The agreement is being filed pursuant to Section 73.3613 of the Rules. If you should have any questions about this matter, please contact me. Respectfully sutenitted, RJF2/cjp2 Enclosure Dow Lohnes PLLC Washington, DC I Atlanta, GA 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036-6802 Attorneys at Law T 202.776.2000 F 202.776.2222 www.dowlohnes.com CBS AFFILIATE RELATIONS A Unit of CBS Corporation AFFILIATION AGREEMENT CBS AFFILIATE RELATIONS, A Unit of CBS Corporation, 51 West 52 Street, New York, New York 10019 ("CBS"), and WBNG LICENSE INC. ("Broadcaster"), authorized to operate television station WBNG-TV at Binghamton, New York on channel number 7 (virtual channel 12) ("Affiliated Station"), hereby mutually covenant and agree, as of January 1, 2011, as follows: I. Definitions. The following terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Paragraph 1: "Adjusted CBS Households" means the total of Affiliated Station Households for all television stations affiliated with the CBS Network, minus the total number of television households for the 1997-98 Broadcast Season in the DMAs in which a television station is owned by CBS or any Affiliate thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Trying to Promote Network Entry: from the Chain Broadcasting Rules to the Channel Occupancy Rule and Beyond
    Trying to Promote Network Entry: From the Chain Broadcasting Rules to the Channel Occupancy Rule and Beyond Stanley M. Besen Review of Industrial Organization An International Journal Published for the Industrial Organization Society ISSN 0889-938X Volume 45 Number 3 Rev Ind Organ (2014) 45:275-293 DOI 10.1007/s11151-014-9424-1 1 23 Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media New York. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self- archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”. 1 23 Author's personal copy Rev Ind Organ (2014) 45:275–293 DOI 10.1007/s11151-014-9424-1 Trying to Promote Network Entry: From the Chain Broadcasting Rules to the Channel Occupancy Rule and Beyond Stanley M. Besen Published online: 25 June 2014 © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014 Abstract This article traces the efforts by the U.S. Federal Communications Com- mission to promote the entry of new networks, starting from its regulation of radio networks under the Chain Broadcasting Rules, through its regulation of broadcast television networks under its Financial Interest and Syndication Rules and its Prime Time Access Rule, and finally to its regulation of cable television networks under its Channel Occupancy and Leased Access Rules and its National Ownership Cap.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-127 513. in General
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-127 513. In general, ordinary market contracting is an efficient governance structure for transactions supported by general purpose assets not dedicated to the specific output demand of a given customer. As asset specificity deepens, market contracting as a governance structure gives way to either hybrid structures or hierarchy (vertical integration) as the least costly to organize transactions.1o88 The pervasiveness of asset specificity in the program production industry suggests that complex contracts between broadcast television networks and program suppliers may not be the least costly governance structure for effectuating transactions. 5 14. Broadcast television networks have a single, strategic focus, namely, the maximization of the number of television viewers that are attracted to mass audience and niche audience programming.i089 This strategic focus is crucial to broadcast television networks, since the sale of audiences to national advertisers provides their only stream of revenue from broadcast operations in contrast to cable networks which may receive both advertiser and subscriber revenue."'" By contrast, local broadcast television stations pursue a more complex business strategy as licensed broadcast facilities. First, the local station seeks to maximize the size of its audience it attracts within its local television market. If the local station is a network affiliate, then the local station will promote the network's program schedule together with syndicated programming the station may acquire to help fill out its daily program schedule. Second, the local station will also promote its own locally-produced programming, such as news and public affairs programming, that it believes is responsive to issues or viewer preferences in the communities served by the station Station management may vary the allocation of time devoted to any particular type of programming, including network programming, to respond to emerging preferences or news events in the communities located in its local television market.
    [Show full text]
  • Laplatney Testimony.Pdf
    Hearing on “Exploring the Value of Spectrum in the U.S. Economy” United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet March 2, 2017 Statement of Pat LaPlatney, Raycom Media On behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). My name is Pat LaPlatney, and I am the president and chief executive officer of Raycom Media, where I oversee 60 broadcast television stations stretching from Hattiesburg to Honolulu, as well as a number of production and digital media properties. I am testifying today on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters, where I serve as a member of the Television Board of Directors and represent more than 1,300 full-power local television stations. This includes stations owned by major networks like ABC, CBS, Univision, Fox and NBC; separately-owned network affiliate stations and independent broadcasters. Each of these stations serves its community with free over-the-air television that combines locally-focused content, including highly valued local news, with the most-watched entertainment programming in the media landscape. I appreciate you inviting me here today to speak about the upcoming, voluntary upgrade that broadcasters across the country, and throughout the world, for that matter, are planning to make to the Next Generation Television standard, ATSC 3.0. Next Gen TV will drastically improve and expand the experience of the large and growing population of over-the-air broadcast television viewers – and in a more spectrally efficient manner that requires no additional government funds.
    [Show full text]
  • Stations That Choose Not to Be Carried on a Cable System -- Enable a Network Affiliate That Elects Retransmission Consent To
    -21- stations that choose not to be carried on a cable system -­ enable a network affiliate that elects retransmission consent to prevent cable subscribers from obtaining access to all network programming. Under Section 325, a station may decide to withhold -22- Congress did not codify the Commission's network non­ duplication rules in the statute. In fact, there is no indication that Congress was even aware that a system might not be able to provide subscribers with any network programming. The Commission has discretion to ensure that the public interest is served by this new signal carriage environment. It should exercise that discretion to ensure the continued availability of network programming to cable subscribers. C. Prohibiting Exclusive Retransmission Consent Agreements is Not Warranted .. The Report and Order concluded that: in view of the concerns that led Congress to regulate program access and cable signal carriage agreements, we believe that it is appropriate to extend the same nonexc1usivity safeguards to noncab1e multichannel distributors with respect to television broadcast signals, at least initially. Accordingly, we will prohibit exclusive retransmission consent agreements between television broadcast stations and cable operators. Report and Order para. 179. This rUling stands in stark contrast to the Commission's view that lias a general matter, the public interest in exclusivity in the sale of entertainment programming is widely recognized. 1I25/ It also is contrary to the Commission's belief that broadcasters should be entitled to obtain and enforce exclusivity, in the form of network non-duplication and syndex, 25/ Implementation of Sections 12 and 19 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, MM Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Television Broadcast Stations
    Federal Communications Commission § 73.624 applicable, to the following applica- analog television channel, it must also tions and petitions will be deemed mu- transmit at least one over-the-air video tually exclusive with those applica- program signal on the DTV channel. tions and petitions: The DTV service that is provided pur- (A) Other DTV applications filed the suant to this paragraph must be at same day; least comparable in resolution to the (B) Rulemaking petitions to amend analog television station programming the DTV table of allotments for which transmitted to viewers on the analog a Notice of Proposed Rule Making had channel. been released and the comment dead- (1) DTV broadcast station permittees line specified therein had not passed and licensees required to construct and prior to the filing date of the DTV ap- operate a DTV station by May 1, 2002, plication; and or May 1, 2003, pursuant to paragraph (C) Earlier-filed rulemaking petitions (d) of this section must, at a minimum, to amend the DTV table of allotments beginning on the date on which the for which a Notice of Proposed Rule DTV station is required to be con- Making had not been released. structed, provide a digital video pro- (3) DTV applicants, DTV applicants gram signal, of the quality described in and NTSC applicants, or DTV appli- paragraph (b) of this section, during cants and DTV rulemaking petitioners prime time hours as defined in that are mutually exclusive pursuant § 79.3(a)(6) of this chapter. These licens- to this section will be notified by Pub- ees and permittees must also comply lic Notice and provided with a 90-day with the minimum operating hours re- period of time to resolve their mutual quirements in paragraph (f) of this sec- exclusivity via engineering amendment tion.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 00-416 Before the Federal
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 00-416 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Technical Standards for Determining Eligibility ) For Satellite-Delivered Network Signals Pursuant ) ET Docket No. 00-90 To the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act ) REPORT Adopted: November 29, 2000 Released: November 29, 2000 By the Commission: 1. As required by the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (SHVIA),1 we are providing this Report to Congress on our evaluation of whether the signal intensity standard used to determine the eligibility of satellite television subscribers to receive retransmitted distant signals of network stations (hereinafter, “the distant network signal eligibility standard”) should be modified or replaced. The Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA),2 enacted in 1988, provides that only those satellite subscribers who cannot receive an acceptable signal over-the-air from a local network affiliate may receive a “distant” network signal. The existing standard uses the Grade B signal intensity values that have long been used within the television broadcast service for determining station service area contours.3 In the Notice of Inquiry (NOI) in this proceeding, we sought information and comment on all technical parameters that scientifically could be considered to affect the quality of over-the-air reception of television pictures.4 We also sought information and comment on an appropriate eligibility standard for digital signals. We stressed that we were not considering alteration of the Grade B standard for any purpose other than determining eligibility to receive retransmitted distant network signals.5 In response to the NOI, eight comments and six reply comments were filed in the proceeding.6 1 Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999, Pub.L.
    [Show full text]