Editing DuMont Television Network (section)

===Disputes with AT&T and Paramount===
DuMont struggled to get its programs aired in many parts of the country, in part due to technical limitations of network lines maintained by telephone company [[AT&T Corporation]]. During the 1940s and 1950s, television signals were sent between stations via [[coaxial cable]] and [[microwave]] links owned by AT&T. The service provider did not have enough circuits to provide signal relay service from the four networks to all of their affiliates at the same time, so AT&T allocated times when each network could offer live programs to its affiliates. In 1950, AT&T allotted NBC and CBS each over 100 hours of live [[prime time]] network service, but gave ABC 53 hours, and DuMont 37. AT&T also required each television network to lease both radio and television lines. DuMont was the only television network without a radio network, so it was the only network forced to pay for a service it did not use. DuMont protested AT&T's actions with the Federal Communications Commission, and eventually reached a compromise.<ref name="Auter">{{cite journal| last = Auter| first = P.J.| author2 = Boyd, D.A.| title = DuMont: The Original Fourth Television Network| journal = Journal of Popular Culture| volume = 29| issue = 3| pages = 63–83| year = 1995| url = http://www.auter.tv/info/publications/articles/DuMontJPC.pdf| doi = 10.1111/j.0022-3840.1995.00063.x| access-date = June 28, 2009| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110904175321/http://www.auter.tv/info/publications/articles/DuMontJPC.pdf| archive-date = September 4, 2011| url-status = live}}</ref>

DuMont's biggest corporate hurdle may have been with the company's own partner, Paramount. Relations between the two companies were strained as early as 1939 when Paramount opened experimental television stations in Los Angeles and Chicago without DuMont's involvement. Dr. DuMont claimed that the original 1937 acquisition proposal required Paramount to expand its television interests "through DuMont". Paramount representative Paul Raibourn, who also was a member of DuMont's board of directors, denied that any such restriction had ever been discussed, but Dr. DuMont was vindicated by a 1953 examination of the original draft document.<ref name="Hess1">Hess, Gary Newton (1979). ''An Historical Study of the DuMont Television Network'', p 91. New York: Arno Press. {{ISBN|0-405-11758-2}}.</ref>

DuMont aspired to grow beyond its three stations, applying for new television station licenses in [[Cincinnati]] and [[Cleveland]] in 1947.<ref name="Hess2">Hess, Gary Newton (1979). ''An Historical Study of the DuMont Television Network'', pp. 52–53. New York: Arno Press. {{ISBN|0-405-11758-2}}.</ref> This would have given the network five [[owned-and-operated station]]s (O&Os), the maximum allowed by the FCC at the time. However, DuMont was hampered by Paramount's two stations -- [[KTLA]] (channel 5) in Los Angeles and WBKB (channel 4, now [[WBBM-TV]] on channel 2) in Chicago – the descendants of the two experimental stations that rankled DuMont in 1940. Although these stations generally did not carry DuMont programming (KTLA did for just one year, 1947 to 1948), and, in fact, competed against DuMont's affiliates in those cities the FCC ruled that Paramount essentially controlled DuMont, which effectively placed the network at the five-station cap.<ref>[http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/history_center/oral_history/abstracts/goldsmith8ab.html IEEE History Center: Thomas Goldsmith Abstract] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081209110341/http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/history_center/oral_history/abstracts/goldsmith8ab.html |date=December 9, 2008 }} (May 14, 1973). IEEE History Center. Retrieved on January 6, 2007.</ref> Paramount's exertion of influence over the network's management and the power of its voting stock led the FCC to its conclusion.<ref>Weinstein, David (2004). ''The Forgotten Network: DuMont and the Birth of American Television'' (pp. 24–25). Philadelphia: Temple University.</ref> Thus, DuMont was unable to open additional stations as long as Paramount owned stations or owned a portion of DuMont. Paramount refused to sell.

In 1949, Paramount Pictures launched the [[Paramount Television Network]], a service that provided local television stations with filmed television programs. Paramount's network "undercut the company that it had invested in."<ref name="Auter"/> Paramount did not share its stars, big budgets, or filmed programs with DuMont; the company had stopped financially supporting DuMont in 1941.<ref name="Auter"/> Although Paramount executives indicated they would produce programs for DuMont, the studio never supplied the network with programs or technical assistance.<ref name="White3">{{cite book|last=White|first=Timothy R.|title=Hollywood's Attempt to Appropriate Television: The Case of Paramount Pictures|publisher=UMI|location=Ann Arbor, MI|year=1992|pages=117–118}}</ref> The acrimonious relationship between Paramount and DuMont climaxed during the 1953 FCC hearings regarding the ABC–[[United Paramount Theaters]] merger when Paul Raibourn, an executive at Paramount, publicly derided the quality of DuMont television sets in court testimony.<ref name="White">White, Timothy R. (1992). [https://www.jstor.org/stable/1225506 "Hollywood on (Re)Trial: The American Broadcasting-United Paramount Merger Hearing"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161007034251/https://www.jstor.org/stable/1225506 |date=October 7, 2016 }} ''Cinema Journal'', Vol. 31, No. 3. (Spring, 1992), pp. 19–36.</ref>