TV on the Radio
yeah yeah… it’s a band…
I heard one of those “Stand up to the broadcasters” commercials from Shaw Cable.
stand up to who?
basic story is this: Broadcasters in Canada want Cable providers to pay a fee to carry their programming (shock, awe, et cetera)
The cable companies are saying it’s not fair, because if they have to pay, then they have to pass the cost on to their subscribers. Seems fair, right?
Except, despite the fact that they currently get that programming for FREE… they already charge their subscribers to receive it.
This is the crux of the argument the broadcasters have made – if YOU are going to charge for something we give away for free, you should share in the profits you’re making doing so. Why should we get nothing for profits you make off of us?
say you design something, and provide it for non-commercial use for free… does that mean you have to give it to those using those products commercially for free as well?
Nope.
That is exactly the argument in this case.
Maybe the cable providers should get the product for free – but in that case, they should also provide it for free, since it isn’t costing them anything, seeing as it uses the same infrastructure that they use to provide programming that they pay for.
It seems, to me, to be a slam dunk kinda case.
Of course, the cable companies don’t want you to look at it that way – they like making profits off of something that they don’t pay for – can’t say I blame them – but don’t believe for a second that they would have to charge more if they paid, since they already do charge more.
Again, if you charge for something someone else makes, whoever made it should get a share in the profits.
Small scale example – if I give you a cup of coffee free, and you sell it for 5 bucks… what is my incentive to give you another cup of coffee? I mean… I’m out a cup of coffee… and you have 5 bucks… so give me a buck, and I’ll give you another cup, which you can turn around and sell for 5 bucks (supplier/distributor model)