Charter's Preliminary Injunction Arguments Baseless, Univision Says
Charter Communications hasn't come even close to satisfying any part of the preliminary injunction test and uses baseless arguments to cloud its frivolous case and lack of irreparable injury, Univision said in an opposition filed Monday in New York State…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Supreme Court against Charter's blackout restraining order (see 1702020072). It said Charter, by seeking an injunction preventing the termination of the Univision signal on its system, is now arguing the opposite of what it did in 2016, before the year-end expiration of the programmer's agreement with Time Warner Cable. Univision said Charter's argument it has a reduced burden of showing likeliness of success isn't supported by case law, and its irreparable injury arguments don't fly since it could simply pay the new rates Univision is seeking. It said if Charter had just paid those rates and sued or counterclaimed seeking the difference between them and what was charged under the TWC agreement, Univision would have provided Charter with programing pending the outcome of the litigation. Univision said the balance of equities test "clearly does not tip in Charter's favor" since the injunction would force Univision to provide programming at a discount against its business interests. The operator didn't comment Tuesday.