FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable Loretta Sanchez 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
1211 Longworth House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congresswoman Sanchez: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
experiences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter- the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 -The Honorable Loretta Sanchez 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out fi-om carriage on traditional cable networks. 83 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
83 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse progranm1ing from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Loretta Sanchez 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."84 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
84 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Loretta Sanchez 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Sincere!~~~ 
~ ~ 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable David Scott 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
225 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Scott: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
experiences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 - The Honorable David Scott 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 85 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
85 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFY me. TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable David Scott 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."86 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
86 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4 - The Honorable David Scott 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable Terri A. Sewell 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
1133 Longworth House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congresswoman Sewell: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 - The Honorable Terri A. Sewell 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks.87 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
87 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the cunent system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box itmovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 -The Honorable Terri A. Sewell 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfi:ed Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."88 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent oftoday's pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
88 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4 - The Honorable Terri A. Sewell 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable Kyrsten Sinema 
U.S. House of Representatives 
1530 Longworth House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congresswoman Sinema: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 - The Honorable Kyrsten Sinema 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks.89 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
89 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 20 16) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFY me. TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Kyrsten Sinema 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."90 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent oftoday's pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
90 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Kyrsten Sinema 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFF ICE OF 
THE C HA I RMAN 
The Honorable Albio Sires 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
2342 Rayburn House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Sires: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
ofviewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the imp·act on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2- The Honorable Albio Sires 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
chatmellike ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks.91 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
91 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 20 16) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 -The Honorable Albio Sires 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."92 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent oftoday's pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
92 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Albio Sires 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
TH E CHA I RMAN 
The Honorable Mark Takai 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
422 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Takai: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 -The Honorable Mark Takai 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks.93 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority progrmmning. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
93 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the cunent system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSoWhite, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower baniers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFY me. TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 -The Honorable Mark Takai 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."94 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent oftoday's pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
94 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Mark Takai 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFF I CE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable Bennie Thompson 
U.S. House of Representatives 
2466 Rayburn House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Thompson: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 -The Honorable Bennie Thompson 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 95 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move fmward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all ofwhich would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
95 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 20 16) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
progranm1ing strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fotiunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and fmally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Bennie Thompson 
You have been thoughtful in identifYing the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."96 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
96 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4 - The Honorable Bennie Thompson 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable Dina Titus 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
401 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congresswoman Titus: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission' s proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for , 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 -The Honorable Dina Titus 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 97 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal dismpts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
97 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 20 16) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFY me. TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Dina Titus 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."98 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
98 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Dina Titus 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHA I RMAN 
The Honorable Paul Tonko 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
2463 Rayburn House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Tonko: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
experiences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 -The Honorable Paul Tonko 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 99 For the sake of these entrepreneurs and 
the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
99 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 20 16) ("On behalf of 
the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFY me. TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3- The Honorable Paul Tonko 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system."100 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
100 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4 - The Honorable Paul Tonko 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Sincere~~~~ 
};;#S~fi--
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE C H A I RMAN 
The Honorable Norma J. Torres 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
516 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congresswoman Torres: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
experiences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2- The Honorable Nonna J. Torres 
however, MVPDs constrict oppmiunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 101 For the sake of these entrepreneurs 
and the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all ofwhich would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
101 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf 
of the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3- The Honorable Nonna J. Torres 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system." 102 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
102 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Norma J. Torres 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Sincere!~~~~ 
kN7f/{-
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASH INGTON 
OFF ICE OF 
THE CHA I RMAN 
The Honorable Marc Veasey 
U.S. House of Representatives 
414 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Veasey: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter- the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple ofhundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 - The Honorable Marc Veasey 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority chmmels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 103 For the sake ofthese entrepreneurs 
and the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
103 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf 
of the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSoWhite, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and fmally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Marc Veasey 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system." 104 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
104 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Marc Veasey 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable Filemon Vela 
U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
437 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Vela: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
ofviewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
experiences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specificaily requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this propos1:tl were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 - The Honorable Filemon Vela 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 105 For the sake of these entrepreneurs 
and the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
105 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf 
of the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 20 16) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSoWhite, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box ilmovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementil1g this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFY me. TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Filemon Vela 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system." 106 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TV s, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent oftoday's pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
106 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Filemon Vela 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFIC E O F 
T HE CHA I RMAN 
The Honorable Tim Walz 
U.S. House of Representatives 
1034 Longworth House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congressman Walz: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One ofthe central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
ofviewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
expenences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter -the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2 - The Honorable Tim Walz 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 107 For the sake of these entrepreneurs 
and the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all of which would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
107 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf 
of the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the current system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower barriers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Tim Walz 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system." 108 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cam1ot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent of today' s pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees allllually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minmity 
programmers. 
108 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Tim Walz 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler 
FEDERAL CoMMUNICATIONS CoMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFFICE OF 
THE CH A IRM A N 
The Honorable Frederica S. Wilson 
U.S. House of Representatives 
208 Cannon House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Congresswoman Wilson: 
May 23,2016 
Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's proposal for better fostering 
competition in the set-top box and navigation app marketplace. One of the central issues in this 
proceeding is how competition can support and promote diverse and independent voices in our 
media landscape. Your engagement and leadership in our proceeding is invaluable and helps 
further the public discourse on this important issue. 
This February the Commission put out for public comment a proposal that would fulfill 
the statutory requirement of competitive choice for consumers. This action opened a fact-finding 
dialog to build a record upon which to base any final decision. 
The notice-and-comment process, as well as subsequent ex parte communications, will 
constitute the most complete and thorough examination of this issue ever undertaken or 
contemplated. Already, the record contains over 104,000 comments representing a broad range 
of viewpoints and data. This includes both theoretical economic studies, as well as real-life 
experiences. 
In order to provide guidance to commenters, we specifically requested information from 
all sides on the issues you raise in your letter - the impact on all parties in the video marketplace, 
the impact on content diversity and intellectual property, and the impact on consumer privacy­
as well as many other topics. 
As you know, the first round of comments on this proposal were filed last month. 
Responses are due today. However, as with all of our proceedings, we will continue accepting 
comments, studies and observations for the record well after our formal comment period closes. 
And, of course, every single one of these pages of comments will be available online for 
public scrutiny and comment. The ultimate record will no doubt reach multiple of hundreds of 
thousands of pages of information, which is why I am confident it will be the most extensive 
examination of the subject ever undertaken. As always, your participation in the record is 
appreciated. 
As the video ecosystem evolves it should be creating more opportunities for independent 
and minority-owned programming. By using the set top box as a way to limit program carriage, 
Page 2- The Honorable Frederica S. Wilson 
however, MVPDs constrict opportunities. While the most popular MVPD packages contain 200 
to 500 channels, there are currently only two Hispanic-owned and four African-American owned 
networks. Not only is there limited carriage, but there is also limited financial support. While a 
channel like ESPN is paid over $7.00 per month per subscriber by MVPDs, minority channels 
receive pennies. What's more, minority networks are often placed on premium tiers requiring an 
additional payment from the consumer which also limits potential advertising revenues by 
limiting potential audience reach. 
Thus far, our record is replete with comments from minority programmers who have been 
locked out from carriage on traditional cable networks. 109 For the sake of these entrepreneurs 
and the audiences they hope to reach, we must move forward. 
Our proposal would provide minority and independent programmers with an equal 
opportunity to reach their audiences. The proposal would facilitate competition in interfaces, 
search functions, and integration of programming sources, all ofwhich would provide 
programmers with a greater ability to find audiences and consumers with a greater ability to 
access independent and minority programming. For those few independent and minority-owned 
programmers who already have carriage on the traditional pay-TV system, nothing in the 
Commission's proposal disrupts existing contractual relationships between programmers and 
MVPDs. 
109 See, e.g., New England Broadband Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("On behalf 
of the dream that was the Black Education Network and on behalf of all of the other generations of quality 
programming strangled to demise by a merciless cable system, I enthusiastically applaud the FCC's efforts to unlock 
the box!"); GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Fortunately, the FCC 
has the ability to create this opportunity for independent and minority programmers -- but it must act soon before 
cable operators can set the only gatekeepers to this online video market. We need a path to greater distribution of 
this content and the way to do this is to have a competitive set top box or no set top box system. Online video 
minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive with the cun-ent system."); BLQBOX Comments, MB 
Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 1-2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("So why should minorities -or anyone else- care about 
this fight? Because as a battle wages on #OscarsSo White, there are hundreds of thousands of hours of quality 
programming -documentaries, shorts, lifestyle, indie movies, global movies -that don't fit well within the 
traditional ad-based TV model and will never make it onto broadcast, cable or even Netflix and Amazon. And for 
those content creators and the entrepreneurs who want to distribute that work, the only viable market is direct to 
consumers in the streaming world. But as long as the streaming world is locked out from the mainstream, many 
audiences will never find them and they will not succeed. Set-top box innovation would open that system."); The 
Townsend Group Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-90, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unless we eliminate the 
gatekeeper system, we will forever be just talking about how to improve markets for independent and diverse 
programmers. The proposed Unlock the Box regulations significantly lower ban-iers to market entry for diverse and 
independent programmers. In addition, the proposal represents a positive evolution in our vide-programming 
ecosystem bringing us closer to the non-gatekeeper system we deserve. I urge the FCC to move deliberately 
implementing this proposal and finally establishing a cable marketplace that lives up to its potential."); 
UNIFYme.TV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41, 97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) ("Unlock the Box gives 
audiences easy access to diverse programming from streaming services like UNIFY and other content providers who 
have been shutout from cable outlets. Cable and satellite stations have been gatekeepers who have invariably 
dismissed so much rich content and deprived audiences from experiences of old and/or new content."). 
Page 3 - The Honorable Frederica S. Wilson 
You have been thoughtful in identifying the issues that are important to you in this 
proceeding. I owe you the same courtesy insofar as responding to some of the issues that have 
been surrounding this topic: 
• Debra Lee, CEO of BET, recently stated that our proposal would give away "BET 
programming for free." I can assure you nothing in the proposal would require 
anyone to give away their content for free. If there is specific language you or Ms. 
Lee would like to suggest to make that clear, we are interested in seeing this 
language. 
• Alfred Liggins, CEO of TV One, commented: "The programming market today is 
working for content providers seeking to reach consumers, including minority content 
providers." Comments in the record take the opposite view. For instance, GFNTV 
submitted comments that "minority programmers will not be able to grow and thrive 
with the current system." 110 Ultimately, the record being developed will answer this 
question. 
• There have also been continuing allegations about copyright protections. If copyright 
can be protected on Smart TVs, iPads and iPhones, there is little reason to expect it 
cannot similarly be protected on a third party set-top-box or app. We actually 
incorporated the industry's CableCARD license protections into the proposal since 
that has been so successful in protecting content for the last 20 years. Again, if there 
is other language necessary to ensure copyright protections, we are interested in 
seeing such language. 
Developing a robust record addressing these issues will ultimately benefit consumers. 
Ninety-nine percent oftoday's pay TV subscribers lease their set top box. This lack of 
competition has meant few choices and high prices for consumers-on average, $231 in rental 
fees annually for the American household. Even worse for consumers, these rental fees continue 
to increase. One recent analysis found that the cost of cable set-top boxes has risen 185 percent 
since 1994 while the cost of computers, televisions and mobile phones has dropped by 90 percent 
during that same time period. 
The record we are developing will help us address the outstanding issues you raise while 
delivering American consumers meaningful choice, and opening new opportunities for minority 
programmers. 
110 GFNTV Comments, MB Docket Nos. 16-42, 16-41,97-80, at 2 (Apr. 22, 2016) 
Page 4- The Honorable Frederica S. Wilson 
Thank you for your engagement on this important issue. The wisdom inherent in a 
notice-and-comment proceeding is that there is time for continuing an ongoing dialog. I look 
forward to such a dialog with you. 
Tom Wheeler