Originally Posted by justalurker
The broadcasters still get to keep their channels
I don't care who owns the channels. I care about the services on the channels.
[Broadcasters] only give up the bandwidth they want to give up.
This is the problem. Broadcasters then control bandwidth supply.
It's another retrans type time bomb. Maybe it will be ok while bandwidth is plentiful, however long that is. But at some point when bandwidth gets tight, possibly without much warning, wireless bills will skyrocket and broadcasters will reap enormous windfall profits. And/or free broadcast services will rapidly degrade or disappear completely. And anyone who invests in broadcast reception equipment just before that point will suddenly find they've made a very poor investment.
I want the government controlling bandwidth supply, not broadcasters. It's not a perfect system, but at least government is accountable to some degree.
Originally Posted by kenglish
Would you rather just pay twice as much for your internet, so their facilities can sit idle?
If you can explain how paying broadcasters in perpetuity - Goodmon's words - is going to keep broadband prices lower over the long run, I'd love to hear it.
Again, it will be just like retrans. Once we give broadcasters something, we can never take it back. And some day, the FCC will need to consider new rules about good faith bandwidth negotiations, just as they are doing now with retrans.
Originally Posted by willscary
You seem to think that broadcasters should be forced to make all of their money on advertizing revenue.
By George, I think you've got it!
Can't speak for justalurker, but that is very definitely what I think.