[nfb-talk] Losing DVS

[John G. Heim]

Well, here's the URL:
http://www.nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/2002-November/000174.html

I don't know what the point is anyway. You're not denying that the NFB 
actively opposed the FCC regulations that required audio descriptions, are 
you?

I fired off a letter to Dr. Maurer. We'll see what he says.




From: "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Losing DVS


> John,
>
> I can't seem to find the note that had the URL in it.  Could you resend 
> either to me or the list?  From what I know of the issue, I think you are 
> mixing two separate
> issues to some degree to make your point easier to defend, but I'd like to 
> read the reference before saying more.  I will add, though, that there is 
> work going on to
> come up with a standard way to carry DVS information on digital TV.  When 
> this is accomplished, I will be surprised if Wisconsin Public Television 
> won't use it, but
> time will tell.  There was never anything, of which I am aware, that 
> required that the SAP chanel be used for video descriptions.  In fact, in 
> some parts of the country,
> the SAP chanel was used for radio talking book services.  The proponents 
> of DVS may not have anticipated adequately what would happen with digital 
> TV, but also
> the landscape of how to handle this is much more complicated than it was 
> with analog TV.  A digital chanel can have a variable number of programs 
> and other
> services, plus, some thought has to be given to how we as blind people are 
> going to be able to select the service.  Since all the audio chanels and 
> programs are
> loosely associated, pairing a given DVS chanel with the right program is 
> not automatic as it is in analog broadcasts.  I'd like to read the 
> article, though, and it would
> be easier if I didn't have to go search the archives.  If that is not 
> possible, let me know about when you sent the note with the URL since the 
> several notes from you
> that I have found on this computer don't have that information in them but 
> I may have it at home.
>
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:56:20 -0600, John G. Heim wrote:
>
>>Well, fine. But how is that possible when there used to be a FCC 
>>regulation
>>that required DVS and the NFB helped that regulation be struck down in
>>court. I don't suppose you bothered to read the discussion at the URL I
>>quoted, did you? I suppose not because you're not really interested in
>>considering that I may be right.
>
>>Otherwise, please explain to me why the NFB can be considered blameless 
>>when
>>TV and movie producers used the NFB's own statements in their argument
>>against the regulations requiring DVS.  The NFB helped the TV producers 
>>win
>>that case, right? Why then, should I not hold the NFB partially to blame 
>>for
>>losing DVS?
>
>>It's a fair question.
>
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: "T. Joseph Carter" <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>
>>To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 4:49 PM
>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Losing DVS
>
>
>>> They're saying the NFB has little or nothing to do with what WI Public
>>> Telivision does or does not provide in any feed.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 05:27:35PM -0500, Joel Zimba wrote:
>>>> so they two of you are saying that WI Public Television is in fact
>>>> including the DVS signal in their digital feed?
>>>>
>>>> Joel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>
>>>
>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>