Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug
From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee)
Newsgroups: net.dcom,net.video,net.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Satellite viewing "freedoms"
Message-ID: <706@terak.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Sep-85 13:00:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: terak.706
Posted: Tue Sep  3 13:00:14 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Sep-85 20:22:18 EDT
References: <763@vortex.UUCP>
Organization: Calcomp Display Products Division, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.dcom:1248 net.video:1461 net.ham-radio:3166

This has no bearing on the legality/illegality of satellite reception,
but I am miffed at the attitude of TBS, ESPN, etc, that satellite dish
owners should pay for the privilege of viewing the commercials that
they carry.

I can understand the commercial-free services like HBO being upset, but
TBS, ESPN, MTV, etc appear to me to be similar to ABC, CBS, and NBC in
that they carry commercials to cover their costs.

But then, I'm also miffed that PBS thinks I should "contribute" to the
local station so that they can show commercials too.  By the way,
why should they now have the privilege of using the channels which the
FCC had reserved for "non-commercial use only"?

I guess the commercial networks were right when they claimed, ten years
ago, that "pay TV" would simply be charging for the same services that
were already available on commercial broadcast "for free".
-- 
Doug Pardee -- CalComp -- {seismo!noao,decvax!noao,ihnp4}!terak!doug