In the context of the internet it isn't clear what "linear programming" even means. The concept requires the notion of a channel and what is that for the internet, a URL?
That's an odd argument. First its a government term and second it's right in the article:
> So-called linear channels, which offer the viewer a prescheduled lineup of programs, have been the largely exclusive purview of over-the-air broadcasting, cable, and satellite TV.
People still do this. Isn't this a perfect description of if someone says that my Twitch stream will be showing me playing again between 4 and 5 PM?
I thought we had decided that adding "on the Internet" doesn't fundamentally change things. Why would it here?
Just because people want to watch what they want when doesn't mean the FCC should automatically force everyone to put all shows up on-demand on the Internet.
I think of this as a foot in the door. Once OTT MVPDs exist and have paying customers they may have leverage to incrementally negotiate better licensing.
Once OTT MVPDs exist and have paying customers they may have leverage to incrementally negotiate better licensing.
How and why? Viacom's not giving anyone "better" fees to get their programming and you're going to have to get the whole Viacom bundle as well so if you want MTV and Comedy Central you're going to need to license VH1 Classics as well.
Any cost savings you're going to get would be as an OTT MVPD is from infrastructure savings but even then why would an OTT provider severely undercut on pricing?