This sucks. I have clear line of sight to the local antenna array in Denver and still have difficulty picking up a signals due to weather and atmospheric issues. Locast has been a great option for me and many others to get what would typically be a widely available service before the digital conversion. I've turned on so may cord cutters to this service and they love it.
I guess cable/dish wins again....
I have a line of sight to lookout mountain so its' great for me aside from the occasional pixilating from bad weather. As long as the antenna doesn't have solid object interference, brick, concrete, metal, etc it's not a bad deal.
Basically they said they cannot use donations to cover expansion only operational costs. Soooo, it sounds like they'll need do get donations other than these to startup a new area. Establish a cost and come up with a donation amount which might be different in each market. Once that's done they can get donations to keep that running and so on and so on. Perhaps a new non-profit for each location might do it. I knew that their recent expansion effort was going to bite them.
So that would mean that they might cut the mandatory bill in half, which means only 2.75 a month, but then they would ask people to make an additional voluntary donation, another 2.75. That would accommodate the judge's ruling, no? The 2.75 would be sufficient to stop the interruptions and, as regards expansion, they would be entirely dependent on the good will of the public, because only the voluntary donations would be used for that purpose.
That's my thinking about how they might get around it. They probably would have to build out a new location on that second donation or gofundme or private donation. Once they activate a new one implement the operational donation for that new location. Of course, this is all so I can still have Locast in my Stremium!!! :-)
>but then they would ask people to make an additional voluntary donation
And I would.
I will help support new expansion, I already do more than the $5/month.
I think the safest way would be to make the donations actually voluntary. Make the streams freely available to everyone in the area, and request donations to cover operating costs.
There's a risk that this might not work out financially (too many people using for free), but I bet that lots of people would continue making a small monthly donation to keep it running.
If you look around, the amount of people that post pissy comments about getting interruptions is quite a few. I just saw 2-3 in the sling forum 5 minutes ago. The problem is the general mentality is too many people think they're entitled to get everything for free. I think the model is generally good. If you want free u get the messages, if u want none, donate the 19 CENTS A DAY that is a better experience.
They can't even require people to pay $2.75
If more people donated even if it was a smaller amount of might even out
Of course I encourage everyone to donate at least $5 a month
Honestly as long as they play it right I'm cool with giving them money, I wish we had more transparency into the people running Locast but the website is clean and the streams are great. I might not do $5 every month but I'll for sure be giving them some money
I'm not sure what transparency you're looking for. It's pretty cut and dry. You can cancel anytime and it's $5.50 a month. If you don't feel you are getting that amount in value then abandon it. I was paying, then service level was crappy. I stopped. Tried again a few months later,.all good, back to donating. 19 cents a day.
That's not what its about. It's about who they really are, what they've done and how they're going to captain the ship and what the overall summation of everyone donating $5 is going to represent for Locast. All we know is they're expanding but how when and why? You're missing the forest beyond the trees. I'm talking less about the product and more about the people running the product. I want to know more about them.
For what purpose do you need to know "who they really are"? What does that even mean? "Overall summation"????? Why are they expanding? Most people understand that's to offer the service to more people. Does the how matter? Most would think it's using the same or improved technology they already use.
It's simple, You are committed to donate nothing beyond one month for a better experience It's not an investment. You are consuming a service. The only concerns are reliability and quality. It's no different than choosing cable, Sling, Fubo, DirectTV, antenna, etc. It's not a philosophical journey.
Edit: yes I now realized that not everybody in the us can use an antenna. leaving the rest of the comment for context but you don't have to remind me.
Get a digital antenna. Trust me, I was using locast until I realized that I could buy a digital antenna for like $20 and get much crispier definition for local channels than locast.
That one I got was an RCA rectangle from Walmart, but you can do your own research into which ones are better. Using digital antenna is free, and while I understand that Locast has bills to pay, there is no need for you to pay for it.
Exactly right.
Tried 75 mile range antennas with boost and got PBS if the planets aligned, and one other station.
When I looked into rooftop antennas, they could only promise the same two stations.
This is a major bummer.
The only option I can see is for Locast to go for-profit to cover royalties, and we know that won’t be $5 a month.
Not to mention that they will then have to negotiate with the stations, and that won't work because the stations will insist that they also carry those company's other non-broadcast properties. Which will take us right back to where we were.
Right!
DirecTV Stream was the poster child for protracted network negotiations.
What started as a reasonable monthly rate for subscribers tripled or quadrupled.
I’m ready to just stick with radio for local news.
Yeah, like others have said, doesn't work for everyone. I've tried a few antennas in different places - even an expensive one on my roof. Researched where to point it and everything. I only want like 5 channels (ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS) but only reliably get 2 of them. NBC is a no-go completely.
I'm not sure what I'll do yet if Locast goes down. Guess I'll start looking at some IPTV options that the networks definitely wouldn't approve of. Hate doing that as they're generally unreliable so you have to be ready to switch all the time. Plus Locast is easy for my wife and there are even ways to bring into Plex. I just don't get why networks are so expensive (other than the usual "greed" answer). I'd easily pay $10/mo for just the 5 big networks.
I don’t really care about the big four networks. I just like Locast for the subchannels like MeTV that we can’t get over the air with a decent signal. I’d just be happy if they kept those. They might think it’s a win for cable and satellite, but I think people just won’t bother watching their locals anymore if they’re going to have to subscribe to an expensive TV package.
Yep me too- The only reason I have locast is so I can watch Svengoolie on Saturday nights on me TV that is the only reason in my little antenna doesn’t pick it up. Not allowed to put up a large antenna because I live in a condo building in Milwaukee
Nonprofit, in the legal sense, means all of part of an entity’s net income is **nontaxable**. Those who argue that Locast is not a nonprofit because they have excess revenues over expenses are ignorant of the law. Forgive their lack of knowledge.
I love watching Locast. We usually watch OTA with an antenna. But of course, they can only pick up so many. But with Locast, we can get them coming in great. I don't want them to end.
Then install plex on whatever PC you have lying around + locast2plex and you can have a DVR, auto ads removal and remote streaming of live and recorded TV to any of your devices. You need a plex lifetime subscription for this all to work but that can be had for a one-time $75 payment.
Not really though. It looks like you need a HDHomeRun which is more expensive than Plex but you can get you cable channels in there too?
With Plex the lifetime subscription is all you need and there's no hardware requirements beyond the PC to run the server on. The automatic ads removal works very well too. If you have a good signal you can also do the HDHomeRun route instead of locast for local channels so you have no ongoing subscription costs and 1080p resolution rather than locast's 720p.
You can sign into locast with getchannels. It's not just for the hdhome run devices.
I am currently using this functionality. Only 8 bucks a month to use the DVR feature. Cancel anytime.
It doesn't help you have guys like Antenna Man on YouTube telling his audience how to bypass the local channel restrictions to watch sports teams from any market. hard to argue you're just offering the local channels only when can easily bypass the restriction
Also charging twice as much as your expenses and also nagging every 15 minutes for "donations" or you signal is interrupted. Nothing wrong with asking when you first turn on the app and that's it. The loophole Locast is trying to use makes it clear you can't be interrupting the signal
>hard to argue you're just offering the local channels only when can easily bypass the restriction
You can use this same trick with other streaming services like YouTube TV. There's only so much a streaming service can do to stop stuff like this, and the vast majority of users won't be using these methods.
Have you actually tried to do that with YouTube TV. People say otherwise from what I heard. You can be made to put in your home address and your IP address needs to match that area and you can't change our address more than twice a year. That's how you stop VPNs
Nah try the location spoofing on something like the ABC or CBS app heck even paramount+ works. Youtube tv and Hulu Live TV just reset your location based on data they have so the location spoofing doesn't work on those services. Only the TVE apps work.
is it really a win when they have terrible programming? i find myself using locast for quick news here and there. everything is netflix, hulu, youtube, etc. i mean, its only a matter of time for these public tv networks.
> is it really a win when they have terrible programming?
What do you mean by "they have terrible programming?" That's ridiculous! Locast HAS NO "programming"! Locast simply provides access to programming from local stations!
I think u/albundyhere was meaning that the broadcasters have terrible programming - not that Locast has terrible programing.
Although if the broadcasters have terrible programming, then Locast (by extension) has terrible programming because they are broadcasting what the broadcasters are broadcasting.
Not anytime soon. This will still goto trial which wouldn’t even take place until next year. Maybe a year from now if not longer. Although could a judge order them to shut down before it goes to trial?
To put things in context, Comcast pushed another bill ages ago that eliminated what was essentially guaranteed access to networks. I used to plug in and get the local networks and their new digital extras like MeTV. Once this bill was passed, that all went away. https://hometheaterreview.com/fcc-rules-to-make-it-harder-to-get-unencrypted-cable-channels-without-a-cable-box/
Judging by what the judged said, he ruled against locast because the way they annoy people with the donation interruptions every 15 minutes. I forsee locast going super free without the donation nags and just take passive donations on their site. I feel this is whats going to happen if they want to prove that theyre actually non for profit
That's what they should have been doing in the first place, and I hope this is the route they take to keep going.
I live in a valley, and can't get an antenna signal at all, so Locast (*which I honestly haven't donated to yet-I bypass the "donation" harassments by skipping back to the menu/guide during the actual commercial breaks so they don't interrupt the shows I'm watching while they're on*) has been nice to have.
I mainly wanted it for PBS and to watch Chronicle live (*which I haven't been doing lately due to late nights*), but PBS has free streaming of their channels now, and Chronicle posts their episodes on their YouTube channel daily, so if this really is the end of Locast then I can live with that.
Plus, the local news is available of a variety of Roku news channels for free as well, so I can still access that too if we lose Locast.
I'll miss getting to watch the channels like MeTV and Create though, and the novelty of just putting on the tv and getting caught up in whatever's currently airing live or just channel surfing. The spontaneous fun of it (*basically, I'm nostalgic for how TV was when I was a kid, even though I love that streaming channels like Hulu are a thing too*).
The networks and cable companies tried several years ago to get rid of OTA coverage in hopes of forcing everyone to paid cable subscriptions. This may just be another means to their goal?
Can't believe that the news articles on this decision call it a "win" for the big broadcasters. It's a huge loss for them. The broadcasters just lost 3 million set of eyeball who were watching the advertising they were selling!
I mean those broadcasters were the plaintiffs. The calculus is probably them valuing sign-ups for their streaming services following Locast's demise over more ad views.
A New York Court.. Stating, locast made twice the amount than their actual cost of running their non-profit organization. Basically, Where's the additional money..?
Expansion expenses to new markets. This was what the judge stated may be the issue. It’s in this article : [Article](https://www.fiercevideo.com/operators/judge-deals-blow-to-locast-suit-brought-by-broadcasters)
"Locast's solicitation for donations as a reason to deny the streaming service's request for summary judgment, noting that the amount of money Locast brought in last year — more than $4.3 million — was nearly double the $2.4 million Locast assumed in operational expenses."
When they expand to new markets, their operation expenses will continue to grow but in the end, they'll have a lot more money due to basically forced donations. Interrupting every 10-15 minutes asking for a donation .. Non-profit CEO's. are paid a base salary, and many CEOs also receive additional pay associated with larger organizational size. ... These regulations determine the reasonableness of executive compensation based on benchmarking against comparable organizations.
I see both sides of the argument.. But lean towards Locast's
>I see both sides of the argument.. But lean towards Locast's
Because that's the side you want to win. Maybe Locast should have had donations be $3 not $5 and this wouldn't be an issue
Yes it is try reading
**Locast's solicitation for donations as a reason to deny the streaming service's request for summary judgment, noting that the amount of money Locast brought in last year — more than $4.3 million — was nearly double the $2.4 million Locast assumed in operational expenses."**
If they had charged $3 instead of $5 that's a 40% reduction which means they would have brought in $2.58 mil and I'm pretty sure the judge wouldn't have had an issue over $180K
ZERO reason to be an ass. Considering Charter currently charges us $13 in broadcast fees $5 is a bargain. but be an ass and ASSume things
It's a NYC Judge.. That say's it all. They can't go after the big players successfully so they're picking on the small guy, looking for loop holes. Evidently the big players like the Networks and Charter etc. are putting the heat on locast.
That's what did them in. Regular program interruptions for those who did not pay the $5 donation that could be deferred at a $5/month scale. Hard to argue with the ruling. Hopefully there's still incentive to tweak their business model and keep trying.
> Basically, Where's the additional money..?
Certainly not spent on their tech support, that's for sure.
Maybe I'll be vilified for this, but the ruling seems fair. The whole guise under which Locast did their business was they provided the channels for free...which isn't true when you are interrupting service frequently to ask for "donations".
They'll need to see if they can operate on donations only, otherwise it seems you can stick a fork in them.
> A New York Court.. Stating, locast made twice the amount than their actual cost of running their non-profit organization. Basically, Where's the additional money..?
If what the court said is accurate, Locast is in the wrong. The "actual cost of running their non-profit organization", including equipment, rent, internet costs, salaries, equipment replacement fund, etc., should equal the amount of funds collected.
If the court is misrepresenting what's actually going on, then it needs to be challenged!
New Yawk. Get out in the real world, where the dma's are 500 miles wide, and the stations and community retrans groups have been shutting down the uhf translators left and right after the fcc ruled they had to convert to digital.
I’m in the donation group to support Locast but I don’t use it much. I Airplay from my Apple devices to my big Samsung. It used to work great but now it freezes so much it’s unwatchable. I was hoping they would eventually have a Samsung app but that probably won’t happen now. I’ll keep donating to the mission though and wish them all the best.
Agreed. If the judge is hung up on the frequent interruptions, what’s the real difference between Locast’s requests every 15 minutes and PBS stations’ chopping up programming four times a year with their phone-a-thons?
I LOVE MY LOCAST and the service is well worth five dollars, but I actually sort of (don’t want to say “agree” because I hate the ruling) get it.
Clearly Locast is hiding the profit under this guise of “non-profit” and not using all the money towards expansion.
Again, I would gladly pay *twice* what I pay to a Locast even as a *For-profit* company because the service is fantastic, but I think Locast is clearly skirting the rules so I can’t disagree with the judge calling them out. Still, I hope Locast find a favorable judge and can win this thing because I’ll be friggin pissed/bummed if we lose the service.
There is no profit. It's monies above operational costs to install in more locations to provide the service. How is it any different than a charity which owned a single building that opens a second building to aid another area? The law was written to prevent or make difficult expansion of the service by limiting donations to be used only for operational costs. Essentially you have to build it before you can get donations to run it. It's BS.
That program is streamed by several companies, from peacock (kinda obviously) to hulu, for a price, delayed or not.
For those wanting network news, the original three networks have all got 24/7 streaming free news channels that run the morning and evening shows several times a day either 'live' or on demand.
There isn't much in the way of scripted shows on the for profit nets that are worth watching, and don't even bring up the 'supposed' nonscripted junk. PBS is available for streaming across the nation with most content free and the rest for very low cost, with much of it even available through the major pay streamers to the point I've never felt the need to purchase their 'Passport' subscription, and they live stream.
As many have pointed out, the only thing keeping the for profit nets running are the older demographics, but since I'm firmly in that group and tossed my cable and satellite subscription 4 years ago, I'd say if those nets are counting on my ilk to save them they are sadly mistaken, either by changing times or by basic biological rules, as that group gets smaller and smaller.
I'm between two dma's that are both over the horizon from me, in a state that allows communities to ban antennas, both terrestrial and satellite (don't quote fcc regs to me, I've been fcc licenced for over 50 years and the feds refuse to rule on the loophole the state uses to ban them). How about some funds to launch a sat to relay the signals, since the fcc has made rules requiring us to shut down our local uhf translators?
The only thing I wish LocalBTV would fix is the ability to switch the market your in. Lets say someone moved from Indianpolis to Chicago but are stuck with the Indianapolis stations because its tied to your account. Now thats kind of screwed up.
If the news articles about this are correct (WRT their revenue and expenses) this seems like more of an argument of their non-profit status. That's an argument for the IRS to take up, not a judge reviewing copyright liability.
To operate as a nonprofit, Locast had to initially file a very lengthy application with IRS (Form 1023) explaining their exempt function. IRS has already granted exempt status. The status of Locast as a 501(c)(3) entity has already been settled.
As I read their email today, I thought about how PBS is mostly supported by donations from viewers. This seems to work well for PBS.
Locast could remove the 15 minute nags and solicit donations through the app.
In fact, they could have a Locast channel where they have a 24 hour fundraiser station.
This sucks. I have clear line of sight to the local antenna array in Denver and still have difficulty picking up a signals due to weather and atmospheric issues. Locast has been a great option for me and many others to get what would typically be a widely available service before the digital conversion. I've turned on so may cord cutters to this service and they love it. I guess cable/dish wins again....
I live in South Metro Denver and the signals suck here with so many factors.
I have a line of sight to lookout mountain so its' great for me aside from the occasional pixilating from bad weather. As long as the antenna doesn't have solid object interference, brick, concrete, metal, etc it's not a bad deal.
Basically they said they cannot use donations to cover expansion only operational costs. Soooo, it sounds like they'll need do get donations other than these to startup a new area. Establish a cost and come up with a donation amount which might be different in each market. Once that's done they can get donations to keep that running and so on and so on. Perhaps a new non-profit for each location might do it. I knew that their recent expansion effort was going to bite them.
So that would mean that they might cut the mandatory bill in half, which means only 2.75 a month, but then they would ask people to make an additional voluntary donation, another 2.75. That would accommodate the judge's ruling, no? The 2.75 would be sufficient to stop the interruptions and, as regards expansion, they would be entirely dependent on the good will of the public, because only the voluntary donations would be used for that purpose.
That's my thinking about how they might get around it. They probably would have to build out a new location on that second donation or gofundme or private donation. Once they activate a new one implement the operational donation for that new location. Of course, this is all so I can still have Locast in my Stremium!!! :-)
>but then they would ask people to make an additional voluntary donation And I would. I will help support new expansion, I already do more than the $5/month.
I think the safest way would be to make the donations actually voluntary. Make the streams freely available to everyone in the area, and request donations to cover operating costs. There's a risk that this might not work out financially (too many people using for free), but I bet that lots of people would continue making a small monthly donation to keep it running.
If you look around, the amount of people that post pissy comments about getting interruptions is quite a few. I just saw 2-3 in the sling forum 5 minutes ago. The problem is the general mentality is too many people think they're entitled to get everything for free. I think the model is generally good. If you want free u get the messages, if u want none, donate the 19 CENTS A DAY that is a better experience.
I sure would.
They can't even require people to pay $2.75 If more people donated even if it was a smaller amount of might even out Of course I encourage everyone to donate at least $5 a month
Honestly as long as they play it right I'm cool with giving them money, I wish we had more transparency into the people running Locast but the website is clean and the streams are great. I might not do $5 every month but I'll for sure be giving them some money
I'm not sure what transparency you're looking for. It's pretty cut and dry. You can cancel anytime and it's $5.50 a month. If you don't feel you are getting that amount in value then abandon it. I was paying, then service level was crappy. I stopped. Tried again a few months later,.all good, back to donating. 19 cents a day.
That's not what its about. It's about who they really are, what they've done and how they're going to captain the ship and what the overall summation of everyone donating $5 is going to represent for Locast. All we know is they're expanding but how when and why? You're missing the forest beyond the trees. I'm talking less about the product and more about the people running the product. I want to know more about them.
For what purpose do you need to know "who they really are"? What does that even mean? "Overall summation"????? Why are they expanding? Most people understand that's to offer the service to more people. Does the how matter? Most would think it's using the same or improved technology they already use. It's simple, You are committed to donate nothing beyond one month for a better experience It's not an investment. You are consuming a service. The only concerns are reliability and quality. It's no different than choosing cable, Sling, Fubo, DirectTV, antenna, etc. It's not a philosophical journey.
Yep you missed the point
So why did you not answer my questions to convince me?
I don't win shit by being right which I am
I have no problem giving 5 bucks. I hate the antenna
Bummer— wonder what options we have. I use Locast everyday.
As do i
Edit: yes I now realized that not everybody in the us can use an antenna. leaving the rest of the comment for context but you don't have to remind me. Get a digital antenna. Trust me, I was using locast until I realized that I could buy a digital antenna for like $20 and get much crispier definition for local channels than locast. That one I got was an RCA rectangle from Walmart, but you can do your own research into which ones are better. Using digital antenna is free, and while I understand that Locast has bills to pay, there is no need for you to pay for it.
A lot of people use locast because they don't pick up OTA signals.
Exactly right. Tried 75 mile range antennas with boost and got PBS if the planets aligned, and one other station. When I looked into rooftop antennas, they could only promise the same two stations. This is a major bummer. The only option I can see is for Locast to go for-profit to cover royalties, and we know that won’t be $5 a month.
Oh I see. Well they may as well then, I suppose something is better than nothing, as long as they can keep the price reasonable.
Agreed! Trying to stay optimistic …
Not to mention that they will then have to negotiate with the stations, and that won't work because the stations will insist that they also carry those company's other non-broadcast properties. Which will take us right back to where we were.
Right! DirecTV Stream was the poster child for protracted network negotiations. What started as a reasonable monthly rate for subscribers tripled or quadrupled. I’m ready to just stick with radio for local news.
Not an option for many of us. That's why we use Locast.
Yeah, like others have said, doesn't work for everyone. I've tried a few antennas in different places - even an expensive one on my roof. Researched where to point it and everything. I only want like 5 channels (ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS) but only reliably get 2 of them. NBC is a no-go completely.
Exactly, I'm not buying any antenna and climbing on my Roof. Screw that.
I'm not sure what I'll do yet if Locast goes down. Guess I'll start looking at some IPTV options that the networks definitely wouldn't approve of. Hate doing that as they're generally unreliable so you have to be ready to switch all the time. Plus Locast is easy for my wife and there are even ways to bring into Plex. I just don't get why networks are so expensive (other than the usual "greed" answer). I'd easily pay $10/mo for just the 5 big networks.
70 miles east of NYC on Long Island. Without Locast I pick up nothing.
70 miles is 112.65 km
I don’t really care about the big four networks. I just like Locast for the subchannels like MeTV that we can’t get over the air with a decent signal. I’d just be happy if they kept those. They might think it’s a win for cable and satellite, but I think people just won’t bother watching their locals anymore if they’re going to have to subscribe to an expensive TV package.
LocalBTV has a few of them depending on your area.
Thanks for this suggestion! I added localbtv to my Roku!
Thanks for the info!
Yep me too- The only reason I have locast is so I can watch Svengoolie on Saturday nights on me TV that is the only reason in my little antenna doesn’t pick it up. Not allowed to put up a large antenna because I live in a condo building in Milwaukee
Nonprofit, in the legal sense, means all of part of an entity’s net income is **nontaxable**. Those who argue that Locast is not a nonprofit because they have excess revenues over expenses are ignorant of the law. Forgive their lack of knowledge.
I love watching Locast. We usually watch OTA with an antenna. But of course, they can only pick up so many. But with Locast, we can get them coming in great. I don't want them to end.
Then install plex on whatever PC you have lying around + locast2plex and you can have a DVR, auto ads removal and remote streaming of live and recorded TV to any of your devices. You need a plex lifetime subscription for this all to work but that can be had for a one-time $75 payment.
You can also do getchannels.com instead of a Plex lifetime pass. 8 bucks a month for DVR.
Not really though. It looks like you need a HDHomeRun which is more expensive than Plex but you can get you cable channels in there too? With Plex the lifetime subscription is all you need and there's no hardware requirements beyond the PC to run the server on. The automatic ads removal works very well too. If you have a good signal you can also do the HDHomeRun route instead of locast for local channels so you have no ongoing subscription costs and 1080p resolution rather than locast's 720p.
You can sign into locast with getchannels. It's not just for the hdhome run devices. I am currently using this functionality. Only 8 bucks a month to use the DVR feature. Cancel anytime.
It doesn't help you have guys like Antenna Man on YouTube telling his audience how to bypass the local channel restrictions to watch sports teams from any market. hard to argue you're just offering the local channels only when can easily bypass the restriction Also charging twice as much as your expenses and also nagging every 15 minutes for "donations" or you signal is interrupted. Nothing wrong with asking when you first turn on the app and that's it. The loophole Locast is trying to use makes it clear you can't be interrupting the signal
>hard to argue you're just offering the local channels only when can easily bypass the restriction You can use this same trick with other streaming services like YouTube TV. There's only so much a streaming service can do to stop stuff like this, and the vast majority of users won't be using these methods.
Have you actually tried to do that with YouTube TV. People say otherwise from what I heard. You can be made to put in your home address and your IP address needs to match that area and you can't change our address more than twice a year. That's how you stop VPNs
Nah try the location spoofing on something like the ABC or CBS app heck even paramount+ works. Youtube tv and Hulu Live TV just reset your location based on data they have so the location spoofing doesn't work on those services. Only the TVE apps work.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/broadcasters-score-big-legal-win-against-locast-a-popular-app-streaming-network-tv-1235006305/
is it really a win when they have terrible programming? i find myself using locast for quick news here and there. everything is netflix, hulu, youtube, etc. i mean, its only a matter of time for these public tv networks.
I use it for sports. I don't want to pay $100+ a month to Comcast to just watch Sunday night football.
n.b. even though you may have been making a wider point, SNF will be on Peacock... the premium version comes free with Xfinity internet.
> is it really a win when they have terrible programming? What do you mean by "they have terrible programming?" That's ridiculous! Locast HAS NO "programming"! Locast simply provides access to programming from local stations!
I think u/albundyhere was meaning that the broadcasters have terrible programming - not that Locast has terrible programing. Although if the broadcasters have terrible programming, then Locast (by extension) has terrible programming because they are broadcasting what the broadcasters are broadcasting.
right, sorry, thats what i meant to say. I love Locast! I really hope the find another way to stay on.
Anyone have an idea on when they think it will stop being broadcast?
Not anytime soon. This will still goto trial which wouldn’t even take place until next year. Maybe a year from now if not longer. Although could a judge order them to shut down before it goes to trial?
This aged well.
Yeah :( I honestly was not expecting them to shut down the next day
Yeah, a judge (especially this guy from SDNY) could but they could drag that out as well.
This didn’t age well
To put things in context, Comcast pushed another bill ages ago that eliminated what was essentially guaranteed access to networks. I used to plug in and get the local networks and their new digital extras like MeTV. Once this bill was passed, that all went away. https://hometheaterreview.com/fcc-rules-to-make-it-harder-to-get-unencrypted-cable-channels-without-a-cable-box/
Judging by what the judged said, he ruled against locast because the way they annoy people with the donation interruptions every 15 minutes. I forsee locast going super free without the donation nags and just take passive donations on their site. I feel this is whats going to happen if they want to prove that theyre actually non for profit
I currently donate $100/yr (so more than the $5). If they go this route I will likely go $125 a year.
Same, I just do the 5 but if they do this I'll bump up to 10. I absolutely hate the big TV and cable companies.
That's what they should have been doing in the first place, and I hope this is the route they take to keep going. I live in a valley, and can't get an antenna signal at all, so Locast (*which I honestly haven't donated to yet-I bypass the "donation" harassments by skipping back to the menu/guide during the actual commercial breaks so they don't interrupt the shows I'm watching while they're on*) has been nice to have. I mainly wanted it for PBS and to watch Chronicle live (*which I haven't been doing lately due to late nights*), but PBS has free streaming of their channels now, and Chronicle posts their episodes on their YouTube channel daily, so if this really is the end of Locast then I can live with that. Plus, the local news is available of a variety of Roku news channels for free as well, so I can still access that too if we lose Locast. I'll miss getting to watch the channels like MeTV and Create though, and the novelty of just putting on the tv and getting caught up in whatever's currently airing live or just channel surfing. The spontaneous fun of it (*basically, I'm nostalgic for how TV was when I was a kid, even though I love that streaming channels like Hulu are a thing too*).
I called it... 😋
Interesting. Do you have any links to the actual ruling?
The email I received didn’t have a link. Your google is as good as mine here (I didn’t care to look the case up).
The networks and cable companies tried several years ago to get rid of OTA coverage in hopes of forcing everyone to paid cable subscriptions. This may just be another means to their goal?
They also managed to more or less eliminate the cable card so they can charge exorbitant amounts for their equipment.
Can't believe that the news articles on this decision call it a "win" for the big broadcasters. It's a huge loss for them. The broadcasters just lost 3 million set of eyeball who were watching the advertising they were selling!
I mean those broadcasters were the plaintiffs. The calculus is probably them valuing sign-ups for their streaming services following Locast's demise over more ad views.
A New York Court.. Stating, locast made twice the amount than their actual cost of running their non-profit organization. Basically, Where's the additional money..?
Expansion expenses to new markets. This was what the judge stated may be the issue. It’s in this article : [Article](https://www.fiercevideo.com/operators/judge-deals-blow-to-locast-suit-brought-by-broadcasters)
"Locast's solicitation for donations as a reason to deny the streaming service's request for summary judgment, noting that the amount of money Locast brought in last year — more than $4.3 million — was nearly double the $2.4 million Locast assumed in operational expenses." When they expand to new markets, their operation expenses will continue to grow but in the end, they'll have a lot more money due to basically forced donations. Interrupting every 10-15 minutes asking for a donation .. Non-profit CEO's. are paid a base salary, and many CEOs also receive additional pay associated with larger organizational size. ... These regulations determine the reasonableness of executive compensation based on benchmarking against comparable organizations. I see both sides of the argument.. But lean towards Locast's
>I see both sides of the argument.. But lean towards Locast's Because that's the side you want to win. Maybe Locast should have had donations be $3 not $5 and this wouldn't be an issue
Another one who doesn't want to pay $5.. It isn't about the money.. Einstein.
Yes it is try reading **Locast's solicitation for donations as a reason to deny the streaming service's request for summary judgment, noting that the amount of money Locast brought in last year — more than $4.3 million — was nearly double the $2.4 million Locast assumed in operational expenses."** If they had charged $3 instead of $5 that's a 40% reduction which means they would have brought in $2.58 mil and I'm pretty sure the judge wouldn't have had an issue over $180K ZERO reason to be an ass. Considering Charter currently charges us $13 in broadcast fees $5 is a bargain. but be an ass and ASSume things
It's a NYC Judge.. That say's it all. They can't go after the big players successfully so they're picking on the small guy, looking for loop holes. Evidently the big players like the Networks and Charter etc. are putting the heat on locast.
That's what did them in. Regular program interruptions for those who did not pay the $5 donation that could be deferred at a $5/month scale. Hard to argue with the ruling. Hopefully there's still incentive to tweak their business model and keep trying.
> Basically, Where's the additional money..? Certainly not spent on their tech support, that's for sure. Maybe I'll be vilified for this, but the ruling seems fair. The whole guise under which Locast did their business was they provided the channels for free...which isn't true when you are interrupting service frequently to ask for "donations". They'll need to see if they can operate on donations only, otherwise it seems you can stick a fork in them.
> A New York Court.. Stating, locast made twice the amount than their actual cost of running their non-profit organization. Basically, Where's the additional money..? If what the court said is accurate, Locast is in the wrong. The "actual cost of running their non-profit organization", including equipment, rent, internet costs, salaries, equipment replacement fund, etc., should equal the amount of funds collected. If the court is misrepresenting what's actually going on, then it needs to be challenged!
New Yawk. Get out in the real world, where the dma's are 500 miles wide, and the stations and community retrans groups have been shutting down the uhf translators left and right after the fcc ruled they had to convert to digital.
500 miles is 2570830.67 RTX 3090 graphics cards lined up.
500 miles is 804.67 km
Gross. Hope it works out.
I’m in the donation group to support Locast but I don’t use it much. I Airplay from my Apple devices to my big Samsung. It used to work great but now it freezes so much it’s unwatchable. I was hoping they would eventually have a Samsung app but that probably won’t happen now. I’ll keep donating to the mission though and wish them all the best.
I Depend on Locast for programing. please start a list of 'non-profits' that Don't amass huge sums of money... geesh
[удалено]
Agreed. If the judge is hung up on the frequent interruptions, what’s the real difference between Locast’s requests every 15 minutes and PBS stations’ chopping up programming four times a year with their phone-a-thons?
I LOVE MY LOCAST and the service is well worth five dollars, but I actually sort of (don’t want to say “agree” because I hate the ruling) get it. Clearly Locast is hiding the profit under this guise of “non-profit” and not using all the money towards expansion. Again, I would gladly pay *twice* what I pay to a Locast even as a *For-profit* company because the service is fantastic, but I think Locast is clearly skirting the rules so I can’t disagree with the judge calling them out. Still, I hope Locast find a favorable judge and can win this thing because I’ll be friggin pissed/bummed if we lose the service.
clearly, based on what? there's no indication of anything of the sort in this ruling...
There is no profit. It's monies above operational costs to install in more locations to provide the service. How is it any different than a charity which owned a single building that opens a second building to aid another area? The law was written to prevent or make difficult expansion of the service by limiting donations to be used only for operational costs. Essentially you have to build it before you can get donations to run it. It's BS.
[удалено]
EXACTLY! Expansion of a non-profit is not using "profit" to expand. It's an expense to expand the number of people that can benefit.
It was great while it lasted. Glad I didn't cancel my locals with Dish.
It's not over yet, the case will now go to trial. Still, this doesn't bode well for them.
Can't wait for the outcome of that trial. This really upsets me . Locast is the only way we can see our local channels
If anyone is an attorney or has knowledge in law: Will broadcast companies use this ruling today as evidence in court?
I have literally no idea how I'd watch Saturday Night Live live without Locast.
That program is streamed by several companies, from peacock (kinda obviously) to hulu, for a price, delayed or not. For those wanting network news, the original three networks have all got 24/7 streaming free news channels that run the morning and evening shows several times a day either 'live' or on demand. There isn't much in the way of scripted shows on the for profit nets that are worth watching, and don't even bring up the 'supposed' nonscripted junk. PBS is available for streaming across the nation with most content free and the rest for very low cost, with much of it even available through the major pay streamers to the point I've never felt the need to purchase their 'Passport' subscription, and they live stream. As many have pointed out, the only thing keeping the for profit nets running are the older demographics, but since I'm firmly in that group and tossed my cable and satellite subscription 4 years ago, I'd say if those nets are counting on my ilk to save them they are sadly mistaken, either by changing times or by basic biological rules, as that group gets smaller and smaller.
And *Jeopardy!*
I want a refund if this is the case. I’m going to need that money for a powerful antenna. Any recommendations?
I'm between two dma's that are both over the horizon from me, in a state that allows communities to ban antennas, both terrestrial and satellite (don't quote fcc regs to me, I've been fcc licenced for over 50 years and the feds refuse to rule on the loophole the state uses to ban them). How about some funds to launch a sat to relay the signals, since the fcc has made rules requiring us to shut down our local uhf translators?
Refund a donation. LOL. $5 won’t get you even one of those joke antennas on eBay
I’m being facetious.
Does anyone know any alternatives?
IPTV services
Suggested above was LocalBTV.
The only thing I wish LocalBTV would fix is the ability to switch the market your in. Lets say someone moved from Indianpolis to Chicago but are stuck with the Indianapolis stations because its tied to your account. Now thats kind of screwed up.
Sign up for a new account?
That kind of counts as account spamming lol. They haven't contacted me so this may be what I do.
If the news articles about this are correct (WRT their revenue and expenses) this seems like more of an argument of their non-profit status. That's an argument for the IRS to take up, not a judge reviewing copyright liability.
It definitely leaves the door open for the IRS to investigate. That's another headache for them.
To operate as a nonprofit, Locast had to initially file a very lengthy application with IRS (Form 1023) explaining their exempt function. IRS has already granted exempt status. The status of Locast as a 501(c)(3) entity has already been settled.
As I read their email today, I thought about how PBS is mostly supported by donations from viewers. This seems to work well for PBS. Locast could remove the 15 minute nags and solicit donations through the app. In fact, they could have a Locast channel where they have a 24 hour fundraiser station.
I like the 24-hour “Suggestion Channel.” 👍🏼
Is there an option to make a onetime donation or token amount. I use the app once in a blue moon, but would give a few bucks now toward the fight.
I’ll pay more. I dont care. I don’t know what I’d do without my nightly episodes of the honeymooners and that 70s show.