Don't Saddle Pay TV With 'Burdens' of ATSC 3.0 Transition, MVPDs Tell FCC

Broadcasters' transition to a new TV standard shouldn't obligate multichannel video programming distributors to make the same transition, said the American Cable Association, AT&T, Dish Network and NCTA in FCC comments posted Thursday and Friday in docket 16-142 on the joint ATSC 3.0 petition from the AWARN Alliance, CTA and NAB (see 1604130065). All full-power broadcast commenters vociferously supported the petition. But pay TV, consumer groups and low-power TV interests said the petition doesn’t take their concerns fully into account, while Dolby Labs hailed ATSC 3.0 for bringing "significant advances" in broadcast audio and video performance (see 1605270024).

Broadcasters transmitting ATSC 3.0 shouldn't be able to cease offering the current standard without FCC approval, said NCTA, while Dish said permission to broadcast 3.0 should be tied to whether a broadcaster's signal is being delivered over the air to its entire market. “In light of the well-documented misbehavior of broadcasters in the exercise of their retransmission consent privileges, the Commission cannot simply rely on 'the market' to sort out the responsibility for expenses and burdens caused by this transition,” ACA said.

All MVPD commenters said the FCC should act to keep the costs of moving to ATSC 3.0 from affecting pay-TV providers. “To avoid the imposition of any additional burdens, broadcasters should be required to maintain an ATSC 1.0 format for delivery to pay-TV providers for the indefinite future,” Dish said. Several commenters also suggested additional obligations for broadcasters moving to ATSC 3.0. The transition shouldn't allow broadcasters to change the area they broadcast to, or to cease broadcasting HD signals, NCTA said. Dish said broadcasters transitioning should be obligated to broadcast using the most advanced technology available and be barred from collecting retransmission fees for areas of their market that don't receive the OTA signal at a certain field strength.

Though broadcasters have presented the ATSC 3.0 petition as being entirely voluntary, the rules proposed in the petition would require MVPDs to carry ATSC 3.0 signals within 60 days of the station's giving notice of the transition, NCTA said. “Such a requirement would be contrary to the must carry provisions of the Cable Act, which require cable operators to carry only a station’s single 'primary video' signal.” NAB and the other petitioners have already tried to address this criticism, said an ex parte filing containing revised proposed rules posted online Thursday. “Joint Petitioners would like to clarify the proposed amended rules to emphasize that MVPDs should not be obligated to carry a Next Generation signal under our framework,” said the filing.

All full-power broadcast and broadcast industry commenters were fully supportive of the new petition. “Next Generation TV will marry the efficiency of the one-to-many delivery platform that is broadcasting with the IP-based applications ecosystem that drives broadband innovation,” said Sinclair. “The time has come for the Commission to undertake the modest rule changes requested in the Petition to enable deployment of Next Generation TV,” said Gates Air. Those sentiments were echoed in filings by Raycom, Tegna and other broadcasters. CPB and PBS also supported the new standard, though they said the FCC should decree that the source of a simulcast broadcast offered by a host station is the station that is the source of the simulcast, in order to allow noncommercial stations to make the transition. Low-power TV commenters LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition and American Television Broadcasting Alliance said the FCC should consider the plight of LPTV in any actual rules.

Public Knowledge and ACA cautioned the FCC to proceed slowly in authorizing the new standard. The information gathering and targeted advertising aspects of ATSC 3.0 raise privacy and regulation concerns the FCC should look into, PK said. The new standard is an opportunity for the FCC to reexamine the public interest obligations of broadcasters, PK said. “Failing to examine the broadcasters’ public interest obligations sooner rather than later may well lead to the development of technology or business practices that preclude or constrain broadcasters’ obligations to the public in the future.”

The FCC may not have the authority to give the transition the go-ahead, ACA said. “To the extent that retransmission of ATSC 3.0 signals would consume additional capacity on cable networks, for example, requiring mandatory carriage of such signals could raise constitutional issues under the First and Fifth Amendments,” it said. “A more appropriate path forward would be to issue a Notice of Inquiry, where the Commission and all interested parties can begin to explore these questions.”