Discussion of FCC, copyright, advertising and other legal issues of importance to radio and television broadcasters and other media companies
Principal Editor: David O’Connor
Here are some of the regulatory developments in the last week of significance to broadcasters -and a few dates to watch in the week ahead – with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
Here are some of the regulatory developments of the last week of significance to broadcasters, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
Last week, there was much written in the press about the MORE Act passing in the House of Representatives, taking actions to decriminalize marijuana under federal law. This would include removing marijuana from Schedule I, which is the list of drugs whose use for almost all purposes is prohibited in the United States. The passage of this bill through the House, though, should not be taken as a sign to start running marijuana advertising on your broadcast station – though there are some signs that the day on which that advertising can be run may be in sight.
First, it is important to remember that this bill passed only in the House of Representatives. Without also being approved by the Senate and being signed by the President, the House’s action had no legal effect. Because of the way that Congress works, if the bill does not pass the Senate in the current legislative session, which ends in the first few days of January 2021, the whole process must start over again – bills do not carry over from one Congressional session to another. So, to become law in the new year, a new Congress would have to start with a new bill, and a new House of Representatives and a new Senate would both have to vote to adopt the legislation.
Continue Reading MORE Act Passes House – But Don’t Rush to Run Marijuana Ads on Your Broadcast Station
One of the last questions about the repacking of the television spectrum following the television incentive auction was whether there would be a UHF television channel set aside in each television market for unlicensed wireless uses. Microsoft and other tech companies have been pushing for that set aside for years, arguing that more capacity…
Here are some of the regulatory developments of the last week of significance to broadcasters, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations. Also, we include a look at actions to watch in the week ahead.
…
December is a busy month for broadcasters with routine filings to complete and action on FCC proceedings that will carry over to the next administration. Keep on top of these dates and deadlines even as your calendar fills up with holiday celebrations.
We start at the beginning of the month, with December 1 being the deadline for the filing of applications for the renewal of license of radio stations in Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, and TV stations in Alabama and Georgia. These stations should have already reviewed their public file (as we noted here, stations should pay particularly close attention to their political files) and be putting the finishing touches on their renewal application (see our article about license renewal preparation here).
Continue Reading December Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters: License Renewals, EEO Filings, DTV Ancillary/Supplementary Fees, Comment Deadlines and More
Here are some of the regulatory developments of the last week of significance to broadcasters, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
In one of those weird little quandaries in the broadcast legal world, the FCC just asked for comments on a petition for declaratory ruling filed by the NAB seeking a clarification as to who is responsible for the content of simulcast streams provided to comply with the ATSC 3.0 conversion rules. Under those rules, for a station to convert to the new NextGen TV transmission system, it must leave behind a simulcast stream of its primary video channel – with that stream being broadcast on a subchannel of a station continuing to operate in the current digital television standard ( a “lighthouse” continuing to transmit the programming to viewers who have not acquired a NextGen TV set – see our articles here, here and here addressing other aspects of the lighthouse signal). In such agreements, there is often a reciprocal agreement that the station hosting the simulcast stream gets to provide its own programming on a simulcast stream of the station that is converting to ATSC 3.0. What has not been explicitly addressed by the FCC is the legal responsibility for the content and other public interest obligations that attach to those streams.
In the normal course, a licensee is responsible for all programming that runs on its station, including on its own subchannel programming streams. As part of the incentive auction and subsequent repacking of the television band, where the FCC blessed channel-sharing arrangements where two or more licensees share a single television channel, the FCC has made clear that there are two separate licensees and each licensee is responsible for their own programming, public file and other regulatory obligations (see our articles here and here on channel sharing). But in the ATSC 3.0 conversion, the question has not been squarely addressed even if the answer is implied, but clearly the NAB is correct that the answer should be made crystal clear.
Continue Reading In the Conversion to NextGen TV, Who is Responsible for the Content of the Simulcast Streams?
The FCC’s Video Division yesterday issued a Notice of Apparent Liability to a Baltimore TV station for airing a commercial for a Hot Wheels product in eight showings of the program “Team Hot Wheels.” The Commission has, for almost 30 years, had a policy against what they term “program-length commercials” – programs that feature characters who are also featured in a commercial that runs during the program. The FCC has been concerned that children may not perceive the difference between a program and a commercial that runs in that program if both feature the same characters. If the whole program is perceived as promoting the product, then the program would exceed the commercial limits in children’s programming set by Congress and incorporated in Section 73.670 of the rules – 10.5 minutes per hour on weekends and 12 minutes per hour on weekdays.
A decade ago, this was a significant issue. On one day in 2010, the FCC issued seven Notices of Apparent Liability, seeking fines of as much as $70,000 for these violations (see our article here). Even before that, we noted how stations can inadvertently find themselves in these situations when featured characters unexpectedly pop up in commercials for products other than those that are directly for products featuring those characters. So, where a cartoon character appears on an ad for a video game, that can make the entire program a commercial – even though the broadcaster may not have realized until after the fact that the character would be featured in the video game commercial. In this week’s case, the facts are a little different, but still emphasize the care that TV broadcasters need to exert to ensure that nothing is aired that could make a program into a program-length commercial.
Continue Reading FCC Proposes $20,000 Fine for TV Station Program-Length Commercial in Children’s Programming
Here are some of the regulatory developments of the last week of significance to broadcasters, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
