Distant Network Shutoff on December 1st?

[boy921]

Hmm, I'll be surprised if I have this straight but here goes.
Since grandfather status was ruled portable by the courts, that means those legally grandfathered to distants with Dish should normally be able to legally transfer that status to DirectTV then - right?

From what I have read, if you are grandfathered and were to cancel your DNS with E*, then later try to reactivate it with E*, you no longer qualify. The grandfathering dies.

So where switching customers might normally have been able to keep their distants by switching to "D", they won't be able to now unless they have copies of those records.

Switching to D* may require a requalification process.

[Greg Bimson]

And Walt, you are correct. Trust me, when the stuff hits the fan on 1 December, there will be a large line of lawyers waiting to hear this one.

That is why we haven't heard anything other than positive news from Dish Network. They don't wish to alert anyone to problems now that they'll have to abide by the injunction. Once people, especially those that had no other access to networks, lose their distant network feeds, there will be some mightily angry subscribers finding out who was at fault. Any lawyer with a modicum of intellect will look to see that Dish Network presented no evidence for their "grandfathered" subscribers, and press for a class-action lawsuit.

[TNGTony]

And after that dust settles, affected subscribers will get two free PPV movies and a letter of apology while the lawers make millions!

See ya
Tony

[Tower Guy]

Since grandfather status was ruled portable by the courts, that means those legally grandfathered to distants with Dish should normally be able to legally transfer that status to DirectTV then - right?

Now if Dish didn't provide the courts with those records, then how can they provide customers wanting to switch to "D" with them either?

Is it possible that E* figured that a loss in courts was inevitable and didn't want to provide their customers the documents that would be required to switch their DNS to D*?

[ThomasRz]

There is no basis for such a suit. Subscribers do not have a constitutionally protected property interest in receiving DNS. The law merely permitted delivery of signals that would have been otherwise been prohibited. I have no doubt that there is some lawyer somewhere that will try and make a buck on this. But it ain't going anywhere. It's really very simple - if you qualify for DNS under the unserved/RV rules, D* will be more than happy to sign you up. A court is not going to be very sympathetic to someone who wants DNS (even if legitimately grandfathered) because of time shifting, convenience, or the "I want it!" attitude. The public policy behind all this is to ensure that everyone has access to network programming if it is technologically possible. There is a bias towards the local affiliate but DNS is there for those who cannot get one or more networks via OTA or LIL. The statutory license was created for this purpose - not to give consumers a smorgasbord of network stations from which to choose. As Greg B. has pointed out (again and again), E* or D* or X* can deliver Wxxx or Kxxx to you - once they have the permission of the copyright owners and local station, if applicable. 17 USC 119/122 is simply a way to shortcircuit this arduous task to, believe it or not, benefit the consumer. Don't be greedy.

And Walt, you are correct. Trust me, when the stuff hits the fan on 1 December, there will be a large line of lawyers waiting to hear this one.

That is why we haven't heard anything other than positive news from Dish Network. They don't wish to alert anyone to problems now that they'll have to abide by the injunction. Once people, especially those that had no other access to networks, lose their distant network feeds, there will be some mightily angry subscribers finding out who was at fault. Any lawyer with a modicum of intellect will look to see that Dish Network presented no evidence for their "grandfathered" subscribers, and press for a class-action lawsuit.

[horza1337]

Simple as this: E* #$%#$ up, E* customers get #$%@#$%# . D* didn't #$%@#$%#$ up, D* customers don't get #$%@#$%@#$%.

[neljtorres]

Everyone is doomed with this whole crapy mess!

[Hall]

Is it possible that E* figured that a loss in courts was inevitable and didn't want to provide their customers the documents that would be required to switch their DNS to D*?

That's a nice idea but I think Dish's recent spell of court cases shows that they go full speed ahead thinking they'll win and do NOT contemplate the scenario that they might lose.

[hokie94]

So has anyone asked E* for their grandfathered status in writing and taken it to D* to see if D* will accomadate it?

[tomdkat]

Based upon a recent court ruling, on December 1st, 2006, there will be
some changes to your DISH Network programming. Rest assured, you will be
able to continue to receive your local networks and other great
programming that DISH Network currently provides. Unfortunately, we will
be no longer able to provide Distant Networks to customers regardless of
past qualifications.

Distant networks are the ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX broadcast channels that
originate from a market outside the community in which our customers
live. Federal law prohibits all satellite and cable companies from
providing these channels to consumers except in very limited
circumstances.

The local ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX network programming in your market will
not be affected.

Our customer service representatives do not have any additional
information. Over the next few days, tune to channel 240 or visit

www.dishnetwork.com

to learn more.

We apologize for the inconvenience and thank you for being a loyal DISH
Network customer.