Carl - you have to think about the ecosystem, not cable boxes. If you are concerned about ISP competition, you need to introduce ISP competition.
The point about the price of a cable box ignores the fact that the box is a part of a complete system, and there are expensive lobbyists both pushing FOR and AGAINST this proposal. If ISPs are really monopolists, then post regulation, they would have given the boxes away free and charged more for the cable programming bundle. It's really no difference to an ISP.
On the other hand, impose new regulations requiring that the cable system allow third party boxes, and third parties are going to give away the boxes (or incorporated the technology in another device), but sell advertising against content they don't pay for. Cable operators pay billions for content - wouldn't it be great to sell ads and not have to pay? And on top of it get more $$$ for viewing data, and selling Search Engine Optimization services to cable programmers? And perhaps steering viewers to their own services?
The proposal would have been a massive transfer of value to different monopolists and would have accelerated the decline of the cable ecosystem.
Sure OTT is coming fast - not fast enough for the big tech companies which get a cut of every click, view and search online.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by pixelm.
Great Scott has it righ
Carl - you have to think about the ecosystem, not cable boxes. If you are concerned about ISP competition, you need to introduce ISP competition.
The point about the price of a cable box ignores the fact that the box is a part of a complete system, and there are expensive lobbyists both pushing FOR and AGAINST this proposal. If ISPs are really monopolists, then post regulation, they would have given the boxes away free and charged more for the cable programming bundle. It's really no difference to an ISP.
On the other hand, impose new regulations requiring that the cable system allow third party boxes, and third parties are going to give away the boxes (or incorporated the technology in another device), but sell advertising against content they don't pay for. Cable operators pay billions for content - wouldn't it be great to sell ads and not have to pay? And on top of it get more $$$ for viewing data, and selling Search Engine Optimization services to cable programmers? And perhaps steering viewers to their own services?
The proposal would have been a massive transfer of value to different monopolists and would have accelerated the decline of the cable ecosystem.
Sure OTT is coming fast - not fast enough for the big tech companies which get a cut of every click, view and search online.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by pixelm.
Submit a story now.