Cablevision Plan Chewed Over By Network Lawyers

[Jeremy Charette]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-04-09T230541Z_01_N09306334_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-NETWORKDVR-CABLESHOW.xml' target='_blank'>http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-04-09T230541Z_01_N09306334_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-NETWORKDVR-CABLESHOW.xml</a><br /><br /></div><i>"A plan by Cablevision Systems Corp. (CVC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) to let cable television viewers pause and store programs on the cable system instead of living room set-top boxes drew the ire of some programmers, two network owners said on Sunday. The discussion is one of the closely watched topics at the annual cable industry show sponsored by the National Cable &amp; Telecommunications Association starting on Sunday. Oxygen Media Inc. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Geraldine Laybourne said lawyers at all programing networks were reviewing Cablevision's so-called Network DVR, or digital video recorder, plans for copyright issues. "I think there are gigantic copyright issues that programmers are dealing with right now," Laybourne, who is co-chair of the show, said after asked for her thoughts on the plan. "Honestly, I think the lawyers at all of our companies are looking at it and trying to figure out a strategy," Laybourne added. "It's a new announcement and it's a very big change.""</i><br /><br /> <img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/logo.gif" /> <br /><br />Time Warner tested a similar service to this, but was shot down by network lawyers because they violated copyright by recording every channel, all the time, and storing the content on their own network. Consumers could then call up this content on demand and re-play it at any time. Cablevision's scheme involves only recording content when customers specify it (schedule a recording), therefore it's the consumer making the choice to record, not the cable provider. The legal ramifications are fairly unclear at this point, but it appears that Cablevision's scheme is on the up and up. Frankly, I wonder why the networks even care, as a service like this only means <i>more </i>potential customers, not less. So what's the downside?

[Felix Torres]

They're afraid of being dis-intermediated.

Think of it: if the Cable companies (which control access to something like 80% of the viewers) start hosting content for on-demand "publishing", the day could (and would) come when they would start cutting deals directly with the producers of the shows, thereby cutting out the middleman; the networks.

Its going to happen eventually, but the networks and local broadcast stations have massive investments in their OTA facilities that they need to protect, so they'll try to kill this at every possible step.

A second reason is the old bugaboo of commercial-zapping. The goal of the Cablevision scheme is to deploy DVR-capable STBs that don't require local drives, so it would be cheaper and more customers could afford it. Anything that makes DVR more prevalent is *not* a good thing in the eyes of people who make a living peddling ads., who see DVRs primarily as a way for viewers to skip past commercials.