Stop Sports Blackouts Act of 2025This bill requires cable and satellite broadcast providers to issue rebates to customers who are denied access to video programming included in their subscription because of programming negotiations. Specifically, where a provider’s negotiations related to the retransmission or carriage of video programming result in the provider failing to offer access to programming included in a customer’s subscription, the customer must be issued a rebate for the affected period. The Federal Communications Commission is directed to issue rules to this effect, including to establish the appropriate amount for such a rebate.
The implications of this bill extend to both consumers and video service providers. By ensuring that subscribers receive financial compensation for blackouts, the bill supports consumer rights and addresses frustrations experienced by viewers during high-stakes sports events. The anticipated regulations from the FCC could lead to more transparent negotiations between providers and content owners, enhancing accountability and fairness in the broadcasting landscape. Furthermore, such changes may challenge existing market practices and drive providers to negotiate more effectively to avoid penalties.
House Bill 888, known as the Stop Sports Blackouts Act of 2025, seeks to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to establish regulations regarding rebates for video programming blackouts. The bill mandates that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) creates rules requiring video service providers to issue rebates to subscribers during periods when they fail to deliver agreed-upon video programming due to negotiations concerning retransmission consent or programming carriage. This is aimed specifically at addressing issues surrounding blackouts of sporting events, which have been a point of contention for viewers and sports fans alike.
While the bill has been broadly supported by consumer advocacy groups and sports fans, there are potential points of contention among video service providers. Providers may argue that mandatory rebates could impose financial burdens on their operations, particularly in negotiations that involve multiple stakeholders. Moreover, there is concern that the bill may create disincentives for providers to offer certain programming altogether, potentially leading to a reduction in available content for consumers. As discussions progress, striking a balance between consumer protection and the operational viability of service providers will be key.
Science, Technology, Communications