The FCC is going to create rules for settling cable/content provider retransmission disputes

[karynnj]

Per the article, Kerry applauds this and says that he says that there is no need for legislation at this point. Kerry really does seem to have been a force behind them working on this.

The FCC today announced they will move forward with a “notice of proposed rulemaking,” a proposed set of rules to reform the way broadcasters and cable companies negotiate during retransmission disputes.
<snip>
“With the FCC taking action and their experts focused on a solution, there’s no need to introduce legislation at this time,” Kerry added. “I will work with the FCC and appreciate the agency listening and acting to foster a better dialogue and a more rational system.”

Kerry has led the Senate’s efforts to reform retransmission disputes. He has sent a series of letters to cable companies, broadcasters, and the FCC during disputes that threatened to cut TV signals for consumers. He also provided draft legislation to the FCC in October to protect consumers and encourage reform. Last month, Kerry chaired a hearing entitled “Television Viewers, Retransmission Consent, and the Public Interest.”

It will really be good if they are able to establish rules that end the drama - and it does make more sense for the FCC to do this as part of their regulation of that industry. (It's also good that they know, if they faltered - legislation is written that can be reintroduced.)

[YvonneCa]

1. The hearings were interesting. The impression I got...

...from Kerry and others on the committee (to cable operators and FCC folks) was "Either you come up with a fix or we will." There also seemed to be a lot of good will between those involved. I'm glad the FCC will work with the providers to make things work. Legislation can then be used only as a last resort.

[karynnj]

2. I agree - there was a huge amount of goodwill between Kerry

and everyone. This might end up as win/win - which would be a win for the consumers.

[YvonneCa]

3. "...which would be a win for the consumers" ...

...most of which will never know of JK's efforts. :7

[karynnj]

4. True - if this actually comes to pass and is seen as successful, Kerry's staff needs to

make sure that at least Massachusetts residents know that it was Kerry who pursued this enough to get the FCC, which was reluctant to get involved in this, to act. This likely will not happen nationwide, because if it actually works, the Obama administration itself will claim that their actions fixed it. Although it would be nice - and some people do credit others, I seriously doubt they would credit Kerry's push, hearings or his legislation. Their plan, even if very similar, will be different. (Just like the Republican never credit Kerry, the SFRC, Pepar etc for "Bush's" unprecedented AIDS in Africa aid - they some times, but only very rarely mention Frist, who in this example might be the most comparable to Kerry on retransmission.)

[beachmom]

5. That's good news. However, there is bad news is some of the FCC proposals.

Especially if you are a Netflix customer who likes to stream videos.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/07/AR2010120706533.html

FCC's pay-as-you-go Internet plan raises video, access questions

As details emerge about the Federal Communications Commission's controversial proposal for regulating Internet providers, a provision that would allow companies to bill customers for how much they surf the Web is drawing special scrutiny.

Analysts say pay-as-you-go Internet access could put the brakes on the burgeoning online video industry, handing a victory to cable and satellite TV providers.

The practice is legal, but had been discouraged by the FCC and by protests from consumers and public interest groups. But wireless companies are moving rapidly in that direction - all major cellphone providers offer subscribers tiered data plans for Internet service. AT&T doesn't offer flat-rate wireless plans for new customers.

The cable companies claim to not want to do that, but in the years to come, I hardly believe them. As it is, it is already happening with smartphones -- one of many reasons why I won't get one. It also reminds me of when I lived in Europe at the turn of the century, and at that point they were behind the U.S. on internet use. Well, it's because you had to pay PER MINUTE. I still remember my husband figuring out a way where I could log in to AOL, grab new e-mails and send ones out all in under a minute. Then I would type e-mails offline. We lived briefly in another apartment where the phone line was shared. We were hit with hundreds of dollars worth of a phone bill because of internet surfing. It was like living in a backwards country when it came to internet use.

So now Europe has reformed those ways and are now WAY ahead of us in terms of broadband bandwidth availability. How the heck did that happen? Now we are looking at another change which will quite literally put us in the Internet Dark Age I lived through in Germany. Just a really bad idea.

1. We need a huge push for more bandwidth infrastructure.
2. We need to have unlimited data plans.
3. If #1 has happened then #2 won't be an issue.