Photo of David Oxenford

David Oxenford

Subscribe to David Oxenford's Posts

David Oxenford represents broadcasting and digital media companies in connection with regulatory, transactional and intellectual property issues. He has represented broadcasters and webcasters before the Federal Communications Commission, the Copyright Royalty Board, courts and other government agencies for over 30 years.

Follow:Read more about David OxenfordDavid's Linkedin ProfileDavid's Twitter Profile

The FCC in a Public Notice released yesterday recognized that some LPTV stations and TV translators may get bumped from their current channels even before full power stations start their transition to new channels to repack the TV band to make parts of it available for wireless Internet operations. The FCC has established windows for the repacking of full-power TV stations where, over a 39 month period, stations that currently operate on Channels 38 and above will be repacked into a smaller TV band under channel 37. LPTV stations are not part of that phased repacking, but instead will have the opportunity to file for displacement channels at some point, probably early next year, if they currently operate on channels 30 or above, or if repacked full-power stations in what will be the core TV band displace the LPTV or translator from their current channel (see our article on that displacement filing window here).

The problem for these secondary stations is that the FCC yesterday announced the grant of construction authorizations for several wireless licensees who bought the cleared TV spectrum. Those wireless companies are free to start testing and operating on portions of the TV band that don’t currently house full-power stations at any time, and some have indicated interest in commencing testing and operations in the very near future. When they do start testing their new facilities on their new spectrum, they may force some existing LPTV stations or TV translators off of their current channels. Once given notice by a wireless operator of its intent to start operations, the LPTV or translator has 120 days to cease operations. If those notices are given in the next month or two, that 120 day period will end before the displacement window for LPTV and translator operators have even filed to seek new channels. So yesterday’s public notice suggested two ways in which these stations can keep operating until they find a permanent, post-repacking home.
Continue Reading FCC Announces Potential Solutions for LPTV Stations that are Displaced Before Getting the Opportunity to File for a New Channel

The incentive auction, where the FCC agreed to buy the spectrum of numerous TV stations so that they could repackage that spectrum and sell it to wireless users, ended with the FCC’s Closing Notice released in April. But, in order to clear contiguous blocks of spectrum for the wireless companies who bought spectrum in the…

Late yesterday, the FCC released the Public Notice setting out the instructions for the upcoming window for Class C and D AM stations to file for new FM translators. The window will be open for the submission of applications from July 26 to August 2 – and mutually exclusive applications filed during that window will…

Last week, the FCC issued a consent decree entered into with a broadcaster who is the licensee of multiple radio stations, many of which were silent for long periods during the last license renewal cycle. As part of the deal, in order to get renewals for 12 stations granted, the licensee agreed to either…

When the FCC last month reinstated the UHF discount (see our article here), it opened the door to ownership consolidation in the television industry, and immediately deals were announced based on the discount being back in place. But public interest groups in DC, fearing too much consolidation, asked the FCC to stay the effect of the rules. When the FCC did not act, the public interest groups last week asked the US Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia for a stay to put the rules on hold. In response, the Court order expedited briefing on the stay request, with the FCC filing its brief Thursday (here) and the public interest groups scheduled to file their brief shortly. Then late yesterday, the Court issued what it termed an “administrative stay” – temporarily putting the rules on hold while it considers the briefs filed by the parties. The Court was careful to say that this administrative stay was not any sort of judgment on the merits of the stay request – it was just putting everything on hold while the Court considered the arguments of the parties.

While there seems to be a rush to put everything on hold, it is interesting to note that there does not seem to be any imminent risk of anything happening, as the FCC procedurally does not seem to be in a position to imminently grant any application that would create new combinations taking advantage of the reinstated UHF discount. Regardless of this anomalous rush to a decision, the issue to be considered by the Court in assessing any stay request is whether the public interest groups have a likelihood of success on the merits of the case, and whether there is irreparable injury if the stay is not issued (see our article here discussing the standards for a judicial stay). In this case, the Court will be assessing whether the new FCC’s reinstatement of the UHF discount was an arbitrary and capricious decision to overturn the FCC’s abolition of the discount – which took place just last August (see our article after the full text of that order was released in September, here).
Continue Reading Court Issues an Administrative Stay on Effective Date of Reinstatement of UHF Discount While It Considers Arguments as to Whether to Put the Discount on Hold

The FCC yesterday announced a consent decree with TEGNA, the licensee of a television station in Jacksonville, Florida, which used simulated EAS tones in a promotional announcement for the Jacksonville Jaguars football team. According to the consent decree, the station ran the announcement only 4 times. It was apparently produced by the team and inserted…

June brings some of the normal regulatory deadlines for stations in certain states. EEO Public Inspection File Reports need to be placed in the public file (or uploaded to the FCC-hosted public file for TV and large-market radio stations) by Full-Power and Class A Television Stations and AM and FM Radio Stations in Arizona, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia that are part of an Employment Unit with 5 or more full-time employees. EEO Mid-Term Reports for Radio Station Employment Units must be filed by radio station employment units with 11 or more full-time employees located in Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming and Television Employment Units with five or more full-time employees in Michigan and Ohio.

There are few broadcast proceedings with comment dates in June. As we wrote here, the FCC has proposed to amend its regulatory fees for broadcasters, in particular changing the allocations of the amount owed by the radio industry to allocate a greater burden to big stations in big markets, and less to smaller stations in small markets. Initial comments are due on June 22, with replies due on July 7.
Continue Reading June Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Comments on Reg Fees, ATSC 3.0 and Routine EEO Filings Highlight the Month

I was recently interviewed by Steve Goldstein of Amplifi Media, a firm that consults for podcast companies, on the difficulties with the use of music in podcasts. That interview has been turned into an article on Steve’s blog, here, discussing these legal issues. That article discusses the same issues that we’ve written about…