Originally Posted by veedon
I like the proposal. It allows the new KVNV to be Channel 3 for all of its OTA viewers while still allowing WFSB and KYW to be Channel 3 both OTA and on cable systems in areas where those stations have historically marketed themselves as Channel 3.
The main objection will likely be that some OTA viewers could be misled into thinking that the KVNV feeds on 3.10, 3.11, etc. are subchannels belonging to station WFSB or subchannels belonging to station KYW. This could be remedied by requiring all of the stations to do station identification announcements (on all of their subchannels) that announce the call letters and maybe even announce the company that owns the station. (Wouldn't it be nice to know what company is responsible for the station?)
Originally Posted by nyctveng
(uhfyagi's) proposal is quite ridiculous...actually f***ing ridiculous. The KVNV/WFSB issue is very isolated. You don't go write new rules and screw with stations that have been on the air with a channel identity for decades to please a new station that is able to go on the air due to a loophole. It is great for the market that a new station is coming but not at the expense of displacing those that have been here.
The proposal of using 3.10+ PSIP sounds fair.
Meredith Corporation overextended themselves by complaining about PMCM TV's PSIP. While I agree that some sort of compromise is helpful - and I think that compromise exists in PMCM's proposal to not seek a channel 3 assignment on Fairfield County, CT. pay TV systems - the reality is that the majority of viewers in this region have been and will be watching these stations via a pay TV service provider. Initially, many observers thought that Meredith's objections were based on this premise, specifically that the right of WFSB to request channel 3 carriage from area MVPDs would be endangered. But as we can now see through FCC filings, this was likely not the case.
I have no objection to PMCM TV's proposal with respect to both it's OTA and retransmitted signal via the regional MVPDs that serve the New York, NY and Fairfield, CT. television markets, except that I strongly feel the portion of that proposal concerning the OTA signal of KVNV is unnecessary.
PMCM TV, by their actions, in no way attempted to displace or interfere with any existing television station. It is important to note that the only objections to KVNV raised have been those by the licensee of a television station that operates outside of KVNV's present or future market.
I encourage anyone interested in this matter to read through the numerous pleadings and exhibits attached thereto filed by all interested parties with the FCC. I'll forewarn: they are quite lengthy. I have read through them, and I've reached this conclusion:
PMCM TV is 100% within its legal rights to both identify its OTA signal as channel 3-1 AND, as a station electing must-carry status, to demand carriage from any MVPD operating within its signal contour on channel 3.
The term "virtual interference", as referenced numerous times by Meredith, is both alien to and absent from the FCC's rules. Prior to its "Alternate PSIP Proposal", PMCM TV sought a compromise in which it would forego its statutory right to seek channel 3 carriage on those MVPDs within Fairfield, CT; apparently that earlier compromise was unsatisfactory to Meredith. Additionally, PMCM TV has noted where, pursuant to statute, every U.S. state - including New Jersey - MUST be served by a commercial VHF television station. To that end, New Jersey has been deprived of this right since June 2009 when WWOR-TV Secaucus signed-off its channel 9 signal, and the constant meritless objections raised by Meredith (licensee of a CONNECTICUT station that operates outside of the New York market) could conceivably deprive New Jersey of it's right to enjoy a commercial VHF television station for potentially years to come should the matter continue in litigation.
The following links direct to the various filings. Incidentally, the July 17, 2014 letter attaches material from AVS forum member Trip Ericson's website http://www.rabbitears.info/
as an exhibit. All pleadings filed with respect to this matter are found within the Correspondence Folder section "Imported Letters"
FCC: KVNV Correspondence Folder: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/corrp_list.pl?Facility_id=86537
FCC: KVNV Imported Letter - July 17, 2014: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/pro...etter_id=50985
FCC: KVNV Imported Letter - July 28, 2014: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/pro...etter_id=52509