Home » Cablevision »Consumer News »Editorial & Site News »Public Policy & Gov't » Currently Reading:

The Cable Programming Racket: Cablevision Sues Viacom for Forced Bundling of Cable Networks

Phillip Dampier February 26, 2013 Cablevision, Consumer News, Editorial & Site News, Public Policy & Gov't 7 Comments

viacomDo you ever wonder why your local cable system suddenly decided to begin carrying barely known networks like Centric, Logo, Palladia, and a dozen other channels you can’t recall ever watching even as providers perennially complain about “increased programming costs?”

The cable dial has gotten increasingly crowded with secondary cable networks that usually occupy three digit channel numbers somewhere in cable dial Siberia, unlikely to be encountered by anyone other than the most hearty channel surfer.

Welcome to the cable network racket, run by the corporate owners of popular cable networks that allegedly force cable operators to also carry (and pay for) lesser-watched networks as part of a broader carriage deal.

Today, Cablevision filed an antitrust lawsuit against Viacom in Manhattan federal court for illegally forcing the cable company to carry and pay for more than a dozen ancillary cable networks it claims customers don’t want, just so Viacom will sell access to popular cable networks including Comedy Central, MTV and Nickelodeon.

“The manner in which Viacom sells its programming is illegal, anti-consumer, and wrong,” Cablevision indicated in a prepared statement. “Viacom’s abuse of its market power is not only illegal, but also prevents Cablevision from delivering the programming that its customers want and that competes with Viacom’s less popular channels.”

Cablevision argues Viacom is hostile with cable operators who don’t want these add-on channels, coercing carriage agreements by threatening “massive financial penalties” or exclusion of popular channels altogether until operators sign up for the majority of Viacom networks.

Cablevision’s complaint asserts that Viacom is engaged in a “per se” illegal tying arrangement in violation of federal antitrust laws. Cablevision also claims Viacom has engaged in unlawful “block booking,” a form of tying  conditions on the sale of a package of rights to the purchaser’s taking of other rights.

Cablevision is seeking a number of remedies including voiding the carriage agreement Cablevision signed with Viacom just last December, a permanent injunction banning Viacom from making carriage agreements conditional on adding other networks, and financial relief in the form of damages and legal costs related to bringing the suit.

Yes

Yes

Viacom-owned networks customers actually want:

  • MTV
  • MTV2
  • Nickelodeon
  • VH1
  • Spike
  • TV Land
  • Comedy Central
  • BET
What?

What?

Viacom’s 14 extra networks you may have never heard of and may not want to pay for:

  • Centric
  • CMT
  • MTV Hits
  • MTV Tr3s
  • Nick Jr.
  • Nicktoons
  • Palladia
  • Teen Nick
  • VH1 Classic
  • VH1 Soul
  • Logo
  • CMT Pure Country
  • Nick 2
  • MTV Jams

Viacom issued a statement minutes ago claiming it would “vigorously defend this transparent attempt by Cablevision to use the courts to renegotiate our existing two-month-old agreement.”

Viacom argues it does not force operators to carry any of its networks, but admitted it does offer financial incentives in the form of lower prices when operators agree to also carry its lesser-known networks. Viacom said that it had “long offered discounts to those who agree to provide additional network distribution.”

Currently there are 7 comments on this Article:

  1. FrankM says:

    Let me correct that list for you…….

    Viacom-owned networks customers actually want:

    * Nickelodeon
    * Comedy Central

    • That list of networks people “want” is based on viewer ratings. Personally, the only one on that list I’ve watched consistently is Comedy Central. MTV/VH1 is a barren wasteland and Spike has gone flaccid.

  2. AP says:

    IT’S ABOUT FREAKING TIME! I hoping this will create a domino effect where ALL TV Providers sue Viacom to start unbundling its channels or allow us to cancel certain channels we don’t want (ex: MTV).

  3. Scott says:

    If it was me, all I’d want would be Comedy Central and only 1 or 2 shows from that, the rest is crap.

  4. Bop says:

    I pick none….

  5. bones says:

    Entering fourth year without any cable TV or satellite. Broadcast TV, Netflix DVD service and streaming have been fine for us. However, I would reconsider cable if allowed to choose the channels and pay accordingly.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

  • Paul Houle: WatchTV legitimizes the idea of unbundling local channels from cable channels and it is about time. For many consumers, retransmission is a waste, ...
  • Paul Houle: I can believe in AT&T's plan, but not Comcast. For better or worse, AT&T is going "all in" on video and is unlike other major providers in ...
  • Phillip Dampier: Yes, that battle with Northwest Broadcasting, which also involved stations in Idaho-Wyoming and California, was the nastiest in recent history, with s...
  • Doug Stoffa: Digital takes up way less space than old analog feeds - agreed. In a given 6 MHz block, the cable company can send down 1 NTSC analog station, 2-4 HD...
  • Phillip Dampier: Digital video TV channels occupy next to nothing as far as bandwidth goes. Just look at the huge number of premium international channels loading up o...
  • Doug Stoffa: It's a bit more complicated than that. Television stations (and the networks that provide them programming) have increased their retransmission fees ...
  • Alex sandro: Most of the companies offer their services with contracts but Spectrum cable company offer contract free offers for initial year which is a very good ...
  • John: I live in of the effected counties, believe it or not our village is twenty three miles from WSKG Tower, approxiamately eighty miles from Syracuse, WS...
  • Wilhelm: I'm in the Finger Lakes where Spectrum removed WROC-8 last Fall, but we still get other Rochester channels, WHAM-13, WHEC-10 and WXXI-21. I have to wo...
  • dhkjsalhf: "Another classic case of businesses being much smarter than governments." I don't know whether this was sarcastic or not, but I feel it's a sentiment...
  • New Yorker: It makes no sense. I wonder sometimes if raising the limits on how much money rich people giving to candidates could make it more expensive to buy of...
  • New Yorker: Will New York go through with the threat? As an upstater I have seen infrastructure projects drag on in cost and time (eg. 1.5 yrs to repair a tiny b...

Your Account: