SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Department of Justice today sued DirecTV and its owner, AT&T, saying the satellite TV company colluded with competitors during contentious negotiations to broadcast Los Angeles Dodgers games
Dodgers games have been blacked out in much of Los Angeles because pay-TV providers have been unwilling to pay the price demanded by SportsNet LA, the Dodgers channel operated by the baseball franchise and Time Warner Cable. But the DOJ's antitrust division placed the blame for this situation on AT&T and DirecTV. In a complaint filed in US District Court in California, it alleges that DirecTV was a "ringleader" in a coordinated scheme with cable companies Cox and Charter, according to a DOJ announcement.
"Dodgers fans were denied a fair, competitive process when DirecTV orchestrated a series of information exchanges with direct competitors that ultimately made consumers less likely to be able to watch their hometown team," Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Sallet said in the DOJ announcement. The lack of a competitive negotiation process is especially bad for consumers in a market like cable television, where customers have "only a handful of choices," he said.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 04 2016, @11:01AM
The very first blackout of any sports event should have triggered collusion and conspiracy investigations. We've been hearing about blackouts since I was a young man. I think the first I ever heard of, involved boxing, but I could be wrong.
Broadcast the damned event, FFS. The sporting organizations already have to much money, just tell them that they cannot prevent broadcast. They can negotiate contracts to their benefit, unless and until a contract might result in a blackout. At that point, the contract becomes null and void.
The broadcasters have something of a responsibility to us, the public, to broadcast. When they hold out for sweet deals, and honor other corporation's sweets, they are failing to perform their duties as a "news" or "broadcast" corporation.
Others here have suggested that it's time to remind the broadcasters that the airwaves belong to US, the PEOPLE. We merely permit them to make use of those airwaves, in our service. Shut one down, to remind the rest that they are there to serve. Profits are all well and good, but they exist to SERVE THE PEOPLE.
Corporate America just sucks. Give America back to the People, please.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 04 2016, @02:35PM
Though I think the airwaves ought to serve the people, I'm not too convinced of the value of a fucking sports event to preempt the owner's rights to them.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday November 04 2016, @03:21PM
Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a Seductive Mirage [gnu.org]
When we are talking about the efficient use of the spectrum, careful definitions matter. I am not sure what "owner's rights" mean in this context. I suspect you mean the "copyright holder's rights", hence the RMS link.
Though, I think I have found a backronym for IP that actually correctly describes how it is all related: Industrial Protectionism.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday November 04 2016, @04:35PM
If you don't watch your circus, you can't have any bread!
How can you have any bread if you didn't what your circus?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 04 2016, @08:19PM
You get a nod of agreement from me. I simply don't have the inclination to watch any sporting event. Football, baseball, golf, nascar, you name it - I just can't be bothered with them. I see little if any value in them. BUT - very nearly all of our fellow Americans - and Europeans too - are engrossed in sports. The go bug-fuck nuts over their favorite teams winning. So, it's apparently important to MOST AMERICANS.
Meanwhile, the corporations are fleecing the masses with these idiot "blackouts". Basically, "You've got to pay what we demand, or you can't watch!" Fek the corporations.