4 ms·
Broadcasters Score Big Legal Win Against Locast
- dv_dt 5y agoIt seems like a strange test to apply that nonprofits are not allowed to expand - or more precisely collect donations in excess of their direct expenses, to be considered a nonprofit. That would seem to be a test that is statistically likely to shrink or extinguish nonprofits.
- jonbaer 5y agoWhat would the real alternative be? A single nonprofit in every market collecting operating donations for just that market?
- RF_Enthusiast 5y agoI think so, like the business model used for US public television and public radio. There are some TV translator clubs around the US that are supported by voluntary subscriptions, who also insert linear streams of hyper-local content and public-access content. I would find value in that, and would consider supporting. (Those translator clubs use low power OTA transmitters, but the Opinion and Order seems to put them on the same footing as a local OTT service)
- dv_dt 5y agoIf you look at the streaming model of public TV though, it seems like you basically don’t get content beyond some very token level unless you pay for a subscription.
- RF_Enthusiast 5y agoYeah, that's the very thing that makes me a financial supporter of public radio and not public television (specifically PBS-member stations). An organization using the exemption of course wouldn't/couldn't implement a paywall.
- banana_giraffe 5y agoIt is an odd specific narrow ruling. Only the reasoning of the ruling surprises me, Locast always felt like a for-profit business on the outside with different words. You either "donate" or suffer commercials and interruptions to service, and their rapid expansion in recent months suggests those donations go pretty far.
- RF_Enthusiast 5y agoI think the Opinion and Order only says that nonprofits are not allowed to expand while claiming the 17 CFR §111(a)(5) exemption.
- hamburgerwah 5y agoBy the time this reaches the supreme court all of these networks will be bankrupt or owned by streaming companies anyway.