OK, so why can't anyone get those licenses? Google was able to get the licenses for the TV service that goes along with Google Fiber, for example.
Why is this always done by the companies that own the infrastructure? Why was Vonage, a company with preexisting no phone infrastructure, able to get into the VoIP business, but no one has been able to do that with TV?
Is it perhaps because some of the cable companies also own the content companies, and so they don't allow this sort of system to develop?
It's because you have to commit to a minimum viewer count if you want anybody to talk to you - i.e., if you want to negotiate content rights for a good channel, expect to pay for a minimum 100.000+ subscribers even if you have 0 or 10.000 viewers for that one.
That means that either you have a large 'captive' viewer base already to make up for it, or you have to be willing to bet a large amount of money (hard to estimate, but think 100m+) before you get your first viewer.
Google Fiber seems to offer a standard cable TV licence, you can subcontract them from resellers if you follow all standard rules and offer the same service as everyone else. Or they might have a cableTV partner that handles that - I don't know their details.
However, if you want anything (I mean, changing a single word in the agreement) nonstandard, then you need offer a decent size deal to make it worth the bother.
Why is this always done by the companies that own the infrastructure? Why was Vonage, a company with preexisting no phone infrastructure, able to get into the VoIP business, but no one has been able to do that with TV?
Is it perhaps because some of the cable companies also own the content companies, and so they don't allow this sort of system to develop?