Liberman Calls Comcast Carriage Complaint Reply Evasive, Misdirected
Comcast is relying on "an unavailing exercise in misdirection and evasion" based on a misread of the law in its reply (see 1606080026) to Liberman Broadcasting's carriage complaint, Liberman said in its response posted Tuesday in docket 16-121. Liberman said…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
contrary to Comcast's argument that only cable networks are video programming vendors (VPVs), Liberman "is a classic VPV in all aspects of the definition and relevant precedent," and Comcast "ineffectually tries" to recast rules against cable distributors requiring a financial interest in a VPV as a carriage condition to mean ownership stake. Comcast had made clear that if Liberman wanted to get basic carriage on the cable operator, it would need to give up a financial interest "in the increasingly valuable broadband feed and [video on demand] rights ... in the programming it produces," Liberman said. It also disputed the Comcast argument the complaint is time-barred. Liberman said Comcast raised a First Amendment challenge to the FCC prohibition on affiliation-based discrimination but didn't acknowledge the commitment Comcast made in its buy of NBCUniversal, in which Comcast waived the right to that claim. Comcast didn't comment Tuesday. The complaint, filed in April, is seen facing tough odds of success (see 1604080013).