The U.S. travel technology firm Sabre may not ring an immediate bell, and perhaps you’ve not yet heard…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
On Sabre/Farelogix Merger, DOJ Mustn’t Undertake a Misguided Antitrust Boondoggle

The U.S. travel technology firm Sabre may not ring an immediate bell, and perhaps you’ve not yet heard of its proposed acquisition of Farelogix, but it looms as one of the most important antitrust cases to approach trial since AT&T/Time-Warner. The transaction’s most significant aspect is the way in which it offers a perfect illustration of overzealous bureaucratic antitrust enforcement, and the way that can delay and also punish American consumers. Specifically, the transaction enhances rather than inhibits market competition, and will benefit both travelers and the travel industry by accelerating innovation.  That’s in part because Sabre and Farelogix aren’t head-to-head market competitors, but rather complementary businesses.  While Sabre serves customers throughout the…[more]

January 13, 2020 • 03:53 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Press Room CFIF Announces Support for Bipartisan “Modern Television Act of 2019”
CFIF Announces Support for Bipartisan “Modern Television Act of 2019” Print
Thursday, July 25 2019

ALEXANDRIA, VA – Today, Representatives Steve Scalise (R - Louisiana) and Anna Eshoo (D – California) introduced the "Modern Television Act of 2019," which would reform America's obsolete and stifling video marketplace laws.  In response, Center for Individual Freedom ("CFIF") Senior Vice President of Legal and Public Affairs Timothy Lee issued the following statement: 

"CFIF enthusiastically supports the Modern Television Act of 2019, which reduces federal government interference in the American video marketplace, and allows negotiations between broadcasters and video programming distributors to occur in more of a free market environment.  Current laws, enacted all the way back in 1992 in a drastically different video environment, distort the free market by tipping the scales in negotiations. 

"Those rules governing retransmission consent, 'must-carry' obligations and compulsory copyright were created in a bygone era when most television markets were served by a single monopoly cable provider.  Nearly three long decades later, the video market is a very different place.  Today, such alternatives as satellite, internet and alternative cable providers offer a wide array of consumer choices.  Unfortunately, however, federal regulations remain unchanged and don't reflect the tectonic shifts that have occurred in the video market.  What that means is that broadcasters enjoy a bureaucratic advantage during negotiations, which in turn allows them to extract exorbitant retransmission consent fees while retaining the option of invoking must-carry laws.  That prevents the free market from properly functioning in this ever-changing consumer arena, and consumers pay the price. 

"Removing the federal bureaucracy's finger from the scale offers dramatic improvement, and improves the ability of all parties to negotiate in a free market in which neither side enjoys an improper government advantage.  The bipartisan Modern Television Act of 2019 introduced by Representatives Scalise and Eshoo helps accomplish that end.  We at CFIF therefore applaud their leadership, and urge Congress to pass the Modern Television Act of 2019 without delay." 

CFIF is a constitutional and free market advocacy organization with over 300,000 supporters and activists nationwide. 

###

Related Articles :
Question of the Week   
Which one of the following was the first African-American soloist to appear at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Perhaps if Democrats had not spent the last three years calling Trump a Russian stooge and traitor then they would have some credibility today. However, the special counsel investigation and the unceasing march to impeach Trump for whatever they find now makes them impossible to take seriously. Despite their best efforts there was no public outcry for impeachment and no break in the ranks by Republicans…[more]
 
 
—Joseph Moreno, Former DOJ Federal Prosecutor
— Joseph Moreno, Former DOJ Federal Prosecutor
 
Liberty Poll   

Should witnesses be called for the Senate impeachment trial, which could take weeks or even months, or be restricted to the record and evidence already produced by the House?