We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
4 The trade press reports that some Commissioners are in favor of a general policy of conditioning translator grants in this manner. At the present time. Section 74.732(e) of the Rules provides that VHF translator grants will not be made to commercial television stations: (1) Where the proposed translator is intended to provide reception beyond the Grade B contour of the television broadcast station proposed to be re-broadcast. (2) Where the proposed VHF translator is intended to provide reception to all or a part of any community located within the Grade A contour of any other television broadcast station for which a construction permit or license has been granted and the programs rebroadcast by the proposed VHF translator will duplicate all or any part of the programs broadcast by such other television broadcast station or stations; Provided, however, that this will not preclude the authorization of a VHF translator intended to improve reception of the parent station's signal to any community, any part of the corporate limits of which is within the principle city service contour of such station. As a direct result of comments filed by interested educational groups, this above provision of the rules does not apply to educational television stations. In view of the active interest in applying more stringent conditions upon translator operations, ETV interests should be vigilant that additional amendments to the translator rules contain appropriate exemptions for educational interests. This is of particular importance because of the relatively large number of translators now operated by ETV stations to provide better and wider coverage for their signals. 7. Property Rights. A viewpoint that is voiced strongly in the comments, including active support by NBC and ABC, and active opposition by NCTA, is that the Commission's proposed rules should contain explicit recognition of property rights in television signals. While the Commission has indicated that it does not propose to deal in these proceedings with the question of whether there is a property right in broadcast signals carried, some commenting parties have argued that the rules as proposed appear to recognize rights of local stations to "require" carriage of its signal, and "permit" CATV operators to carry outside signals in certain instances. Because of this, parties such as ABC urge the Commission to make it clear that any such authorization by the Commission is not intended in ABC's words, to "derogate from any common-law or statutory rights, including those of copyright and unfair competition, which any person, including a Federal Communications Commission licensee, may have in programs thus placed on a cable system." Parties such as NBC and station KCOY-TV, Santa Maria, urge that CATV systems should, like translator stations and regular television stations, be required to obtain the consent of the originating station to rebroadcast its programs.