<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Matthew&#039;s Workbench &#187; Satellite radio</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/tag/satellite-radio/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:34:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Satellite Radio and the HD Radio Requirement</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-hd-radio/</link>
		<comments>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-hd-radio/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Reed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HD Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Satellite radio]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-hd-radio/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Back when there was debate about the Sirius and XM satellite radio merger, various groups suggested potential conditions that might be made part of the deal. Some were discarded but others were agreed upon. For example, both companies made an <a href="http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-open-devices/">open device pledge</a> that will allow manufacturers to add features to their receivers.</p>  <p>One frequently suggested condition was a requirement that all new satellite radios be capable of receiving terrestrial HD Radio stations. The FCC didn’t make that part of the deal, although they are still requesting public comments on the idea. Now Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) has introduced the “<a href="http://markey.house.gov/docs/telecomm/hr7157_final_text.pdf">Radio All Digital Channel Receiver Act</a>”, which would make the FCC implement that HD Radio requirement.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back when there was debate about the Sirius and XM satellite radio merger, various groups suggested potential conditions that might be made part of the deal. Some were discarded but others were agreed upon. For example, both companies made an <a href="http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-open-devices/">open device pledge</a> that will allow manufacturers to add features to their receivers.</p>
<p>One frequently suggested condition was a requirement that all new satellite radios be capable of receiving terrestrial HD Radio stations. The FCC didn’t make that part of the deal, although they are still requesting public comments on the idea. Now Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) has introduced the &ldquo;<a href="http://markey.house.gov/docs/telecomm/hr7157_final_text.pdf">Radio All Digital Channel Receiver Act</a>,&rdquo; which would make the FCC implement that HD Radio requirement.</p>
<p>For obvious reasons, Clear Channel Communications and others that have invested heavily in HD Radio support this bill. Somewhat less obviously, General Motors and Toyota are opposed to it. They stated in a letter to the FCC: &ldquo;The proponents of the proposed condition are seeking an unprecedented requirement regulating the choice of entertainment technologies in an automotive environment.&rdquo;</p>
<p>There is precedent for the FCC mandating hardware, such as requiring UHF receivers and closed-captioning in televisions. But I still would tend to think this requirement will be a tough sell, especially with HD Radio not taking off with consumers the way many had expected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-hd-radio/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Satellite Radio and Open Devices</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-open-devices/</link>
		<comments>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-open-devices/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:01:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Reed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Satellite radio]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-open-devices/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When the FCC granted satellite radio licenses to Sirius Satellite Radio and XM Satellite Radio, one of their specific requirements was that the two license holders not be allowed to merge. Fast forward six years and now it looks as if the FCC will soon approve their merger. As part of FCC deliberations, many people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the FCC granted satellite radio licenses to Sirius Satellite Radio and XM Satellite Radio, one of their specific requirements was that the two license holders not be allowed to merge. Fast forward six years and now it looks as if the FCC will soon approve their merger. As part of FCC deliberations, many people and organizations are jumping in to try and add conditions to the merger.</p>
<p>I was looking at this proposal by U.S. Electronics (you can see the original <a title="Notice of March 10 2008 Ex parte Presentation: XM-Sirius Merger - MB Docket No.07-57" href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1472">here</a>). The core of their proposal involves four conditions. The first three are pretty basic:</p>
<ul>
<li>The new company should make available pricing choices such as a la carte or tiered programming;
<li>The new company should make 5% of its channel capacity available to non-commercial educational and informational programming over which it has no editorial control;
<li>The new company should agree not to raise prices for its combined programming package (as opposed to each individual company’s current programming package) for three years after the merger is approved;</li>
</ul>
<p>But to me the fourth condition is a bit more interesting:</p>
<ul>
<li>The new company should make the technical specifications of its devices and network open and available to allow device manufacturers to develop, and consumers to use, any device they choose without interference. Pursuant to Commission rules, these devices must be certified by the FCC for receiving signals on the frequencies licensed to the merged entity and be subject to a minimum “do-no-harm” requirement.</li>
</ul>
<p>Open devices on satellite radio might sound unworkable at first, but consider this: what if one company controlled the manufacture of all AM and FM radios? What variety of radios do you think would be available? Yet that situation is the rough equivalent of today&#8217;s satellite radio market. </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t expect the FCC to add an open device condition (XM and Sirius are very much against it), but it&#8217;s an interesting idea just the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.matthewsworkbench.com/satellite-radio-and-open-devices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

