DISH -VS- VOOM - A Settlement has been reached!
- Thread starter orlmac
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 2K
- Views 308K
Both parties are responsible for the demise of VOOM in some form or fashion. Unfortunately, the terms of the affiliation agreement and both parties unwillingness to modify the agreement doomed VOOM and have led us down this path of litigation. I can't say for sure who will win (millions are pages and artifacts and dozens of expert witnesses), but VOOM is long-gone and HD-lovers ultimately lose. Yes, I still miss Monsters, WorldSport and a few of their other channels.
RushHD is still on in the UK - Rush HD: Life on the Edge - High Definition Action Sports 24/7
I'm not sure where else VOOM HD (aka International) is playing there days since it no longer on Rainbow's website....but I did find this URL: Rainbow Media Brands: VOOM HD Networks
I'm not sure where else VOOM HD (aka International) is playing there days since it no longer on Rainbow's website....but I did find this URL: Rainbow Media Brands: VOOM HD Networks
Bell canada is showing Equator, Rush and Treasure in their line up. Is it correct?
Channel lineup- bell.ca
Channel lineup- bell.ca
Cablevision is responsible for VOOM's demise, no one else. Cablesivion was lucky after VOOM was out of the business, Charlie agreed to buy its satellite, the mistake he made was to also agree to carry the VOOM HD channels to keep that part of VOOM service on life support on Dishnetwork.
Had he simply just bought the satellite and be done with it, not doing VOOM any more favor, we would never have had a few VOOMers still here crying today. It would have been a clean kill. If anyone thinks I am bashing the VOOMers, just you know I had the VOOM package on DISH at the time and enjoyed it very much but only for so long until they ran out of content, and I never looked back after that.
HDTV has never looked back either.
Ugh! I would like to start with a quote I just found on an Internet investment forum (took all of about 5-seconds): "But no one here is in the same league as jacmyoung's fantasy world of make-believe."
You simply have zero knowledge of the events that unfolded in this case ~or~ if you do, your knowledge of the events is being filtered through your agenda-laden glasses. I simply will not engage you in idiotspeak because it is a battle I cannot win - you are the Victor! Your modus operandi is to bait and infuriate others (those who do not agree with you) with your meritless postings, refusal to listen to any logical argument presented to you, and pushing your "EchoStar can do no wrong" agenda.
You whine and pout about how people should present facts to support their opinions...yet, you discount each and every fact offered simply because you don't accept them. In your world, the only facts are the ones you present or chose to believe. To be honest, your double-talk and rhetoric is wearing very thin on my nerves. Hopefully, you will recall that you have been wrong during each and every phase of the Tivo versus Echostar case. Yet you continue to provide your so-called "expert" opion and commentary regardless of how many times you are proven wrong. Now you're poluting the VOOM versus Echostar thread with your agenda-laden diatribe.
Please, please, please don't polute this thread like you have countless Tivo versus Echostar threads throughout cyberspace with your psycho-babble. Seriously, is posting your double-talk and rhetoric over, and over, and over, and over your full-time job? Perhaps you should listen to real industry experts, like Greg Bimson, who possess a sound understanding of the Tivo versus EchoStar case. Once again, you have been WRONG, WRONG, WRONG and WRONG during each and every phase of the Tivo versus EchoStar case. Needless to say, your agenda-laden "Echostar can do no wrong" trolling won't work in this thread and I will not waste my valuable time and energy addressing any of your posts. I will simply label your comments for what they are - BOHICA (Bend Over Here It Comes Again).
Additionally, your reputation about the Tivo case precedes you (see the attachments). Yes, there are literally thousands of your postings about the Tivo case on SatelliteGuys, AVSForum, DBSquawk, and other forums. I honestly don't know how you find the time to post around-the-clock about this subject. Regardless, there is no need for you to reply to this post since there is nothing of value you can add to this discussion, and I will not reply in kind. Of course, I am sure you will because...well, it is in your nature. While I am certainly no expert in the VOOM versus Echostar case and, while I have formed certain opinions based on the facts that have been presented in public, I try to keep an open-mind, listen to others who aren't pushing an agenda, don't attack people simply because they feel different about the case, or demand "facts" from people who are clearly stating their opion.
Another jacmyoung critic writes, "You know, you assume wrong just to prove a point - it gets irritating after a while."
BOHICA!!! This is an incredible statement. You have zero objectivity if you actually believe this to be true. Then again, it could part of your modus operandi (e.g., "assume wrong just to prove a point") that one of your critics mentioned above.
Attachments
I believe the next status conference is scheduled to occur on 2/26/2010 if I recall. If all goes according to plans, the parties should be able to petition the court for a trial date shortly afterwards. If I were to venture a guess, I say VOOM versus Echostar may actually go to trial sometime during the fall. We shall see..
As usual, not a single fact in your above rant in response to my earlier post which has my opinion based on specific facts predating any dispute of the programming agreement between E* and VOOM. My above opinion is just that, had E* not agreed to carry VOOM, just done Cablevision a favor and bought the satellite, but no they agreed to also throw VOOM a lifeline to continue the 20 or so HD channels, so yes E* asked for it. But let's not forget had E* not done Cablevision that little favor, you would never have had the materials to even go on here, and your so called few VOOMers would never have existed to constantly bitch about what a disservice E* did to you. All I am asking is you VOOMers take the above facts into consideration.
Not saying you cannot bitch, not even saying who is to blame in this contract dispute, only that you should keep the above in mind when you bitch.
Last edited:
BTW just to show how clueless you are, you simply have no ability to tell real from fake. While I have posted a lot on Satelliteguys and the other site regarding the TiVo v. E* case, I never posted on AVSForum, DBSquawk or other forums regarding this case. I have not visited AVSForum for a long time, though maybe two years ago I did post there a lot but had moved on to Satelliteguys and the other site.
It is known that a few TiVo folks used my username to register in many other sites to impersonate me then attack "me" there, apparently they have no guts to face me head on, but you would never be able to see the difference, I am not surprised. At least you are fighting me head on so I must thank you for that.
I did post on the Yahoo TiVo stock forum for a short period of time until I had let enough people there know to go read the TiVo v. E* threads on these current two sites, I left the Yahoo forum after done that job
eFile Update:
The parties met in court on 2/26/2010. In a nutshell, due to the volume of discovery artifacts and depositions, both parties will continue expert witness depositions through the 18th of March, and will require additional time to review expert reports.
Hopefully a trial date will be requested during April. Perhaps we'll see this case go to trial during the fall. We shall see.
My predictions:
- Just like with Tivo, V* will most likely get $500M out of EchoStar after they illegally terminated the affiliation agreement (my opinion)
- VOOM will still be deal-in-the-water as Cablevision will use the money to recoup VOOM losses
The parties met in court on 2/26/2010. In a nutshell, due to the volume of discovery artifacts and depositions, both parties will continue expert witness depositions through the 18th of March, and will require additional time to review expert reports.
Hopefully a trial date will be requested during April. Perhaps we'll see this case go to trial during the fall. We shall see.
My predictions:
- Just like with Tivo, V* will most likely get $500M out of EchoStar after they illegally terminated the affiliation agreement (my opinion)
- VOOM will still be deal-in-the-water as Cablevision will use the money to recoup VOOM losses
VOOM Requesting Trial without Jury - Seeking in excess of 2.5 Billion
Discovery proceeding are complete and the $125.00 filing fee has been paid. This matter is ready for trial as of March 19, 2010. Just waiting on the court to establish a trial date.
Discovery proceeding are complete and the $125.00 filing fee has been paid. This matter is ready for trial as of March 19, 2010. Just waiting on the court to establish a trial date.
I have no idea. In a criminal trial I've heard that if you're guilty you should always request a trail by jury - if not, then you should request trial by judge. I'm not sure what the rationale may be for civil proceedings where the legal standard is "preponderance of the evidence" and not "beyond a reasonable doubt". To be honest, if I were Cablevision the last thing I would want is a trial by jury in the New York area. Just like Comcast, their disgruntled cable customers would bury-them-alive prior to the opening statement.
Oh, while a defendent has a right to request trial by jury or judge in the criminal courts...who decides if the trail will be by judge or jury in a civil matter?
Anyway, just my two cents...
Seems strange to me. Dish is for all practical purposes the "defendant". Rainbow has the burden of proof. Seems like Dish should get the choice. But I guess the plaintiff gets the choice in civil matters.
If the trial is in New York, perhaps Rainbow is worried about getting some disgruntled Cablevision subscribers on the jury.
Other question: anyone know who's lawyers actually drafted the affiliation agreement? This trial will be all about interpreting an ambiguous contract, and I think it is standard that such contracts are interpreted in favor whomever didn't draft the contract.
If the trial is in New York, perhaps Rainbow is worried about getting some disgruntled Cablevision subscribers on the jury.
Other question: anyone know who's lawyers actually drafted the affiliation agreement? This trial will be all about interpreting an ambiguous contract, and I think it is standard that such contracts are interpreted in favor whomever didn't draft the contract.
I have no idea who drafted the affiliation agreement or the preliminary contract (agreement to enter into an affiliation afreement) back in late April 2005 when E* purchased the Rainbow-1 satellite and both parties annouced VOOM was moving over the E*, etc. Although some general information has been made public., the terms & conditions of the affiliation agreement are confidential so your guess is as good as mine. All I can say is someone will be mighty busy reviewing the 2.5 millions of pages of artifacts produced during discovery. Yikes!Seems strange to me. Dish is for all practical purposes the "defendant". Rainbow has the burden of proof. Seems like Dish should get the choice. But I guess the plaintiff gets the choice in civil matters.
If the trial is in New York, perhaps Rainbow is worried about getting some disgruntled Cablevision subscribers on the jury.
Other question: anyone know who's lawyers actually drafted the affiliation agreement? This trial will be all about interpreting an ambiguous contract, and I think it is standard that such contracts are interpreted in favor whomever didn't draft the contract.
Anyway, regarding the jury trial I found this little tidbit about the civil proceedings in the Federal Courts (I asssume it's the same for NY), "If a case is not settled, the court will schedule a trial. In a wide variety of civil cases, either side is entitled under the Constitution to request a jury trial. If the parties waive their right to a jury, then the case will be heard by a judge without a jury."
Last edited:
OK, perhaps it's my alergies and stuffy head...but who are the them?
The 2.5 million pages of docs.
