CBS Seeks to Unwind Retrans Agreement With Dish Network

[Neutron]

I side with DISH on this. If autohop is banned than make the FF and skip options banned too.

 

[Tampa8]

Based solely on Dish's worst practices (as opposed to Industry best practices) of stealing intellectual propert and illegally terminating agreements, and then destroying evidence and lying to conceal their misdeeds, I would tend to believe CBS' statements before giving any creedence to Dish/SATS rebuttal. Now, if CBS can prove that Dish/SATS was required to disclose, or reasonably expected to disclose, information about their soon-to-be-released AutoHop feature that would significantly alter the availability of CBS' advertising stream being distribulted to their audience...well, they are likely to win their case.

IMO, Dish/SATS had an obligation to inform CBS their advertising stream would be negatively affected by AutoHop. Dish had to know its AutoHop feature would affect how CBS could charge their advertisers (heck, they sell customer viewing stats and ad time) and they should have disclosed this information during negotiations so CBS could adjust their rates accordingly. For example, if CBS' is going to lose 30% of ad revenue due to AutoHop they have every right to require Dish/SATS to make up the difference. This concept is known as good faith negotiations. Negotiating in good faith tends to build trust and lead to good and healthy relationships, while trying to pull the wool over the other party's eyes tends to lead to mistrust and subsequently piss poor relationships and a trip to the courtroom. Perhaps this is the reason why Dish/SATS has so many broken relationships with programmers? Perhaps this is the reason why Dish has to many ugly divorces with their business partners. Maybe that's why they are generally viewed as the Gabor sisters of Industry...look good on the outside, but 10-minutes into a binding relationship and you're wanting to choke the life out of their cheating, lying faces. Just call Josh Sapan at AMC and ask his opinion if you don't believe me.

In a nutshell, if AutoHop enables customers to effortlessly bypass commercials and thus rob CBS of advertising revenue (which I supposed they are entitled to do), CBS will have to make up this different by charging higher subscription fees. There is no doubt CBS would have charged a premium if Dish has disclosed that the release of AutoHop was imminent. We shall see...

I don't think I agree with one thing in that post. But not in a mean way!! (Ok one thing - I did think Dish acted foolishly with AMC over the VOOM lawsuit) It's just I am looking at this from a completely different perspective. Just to pick one thing - Dish does not know - or care - if it affects CBS advertisers. They have no obligation to try and determine what CBS might find objectionable. They did not hide they had the technology, only according to CBS that it was vague. Well CBS should be suing their lawyers then for not asking more questions......

 

[osu1991]

Based solely on Dish's worst practices (as opposed to Industry best practices) of stealing intellectual propert and illegally terminating agreements, and then destroying evidence and lying to conceal their misdeeds, I would tend to believe CBS' statements before giving any creedence to Dish/SATS rebuttal. Now, if CBS can prove that Dish/SATS was required to disclose, or reasonably expected to disclose, information about their soon-to-be-released AutoHop feature that would significantly alter the availability of CBS' advertising stream being distribulted to their audience...well, they are likely to win their case.

IMO, Dish/SATS had an obligation to inform CBS their advertising stream would be negatively affected by AutoHop. Dish had to know its AutoHop feature would affect how CBS could charge their advertisers (heck, they sell customer viewing stats and ad time) and they should have disclosed this information during negotiations so CBS could adjust their rates accordingly. For example, if CBS' is going to lose 30% of ad revenue due to AutoHop they have every right to require Dish/SATS to make up the difference. This concept is known as good faith negotiations. Negotiating in good faith tends to build trust and lead to good and healthy relationships, while trying to pull the wool over the other party's eyes tends to lead to mistrust and subsequently piss poor relationships and a trip to the courtroom. Perhaps this is the reason why Dish/SATS has so many broken relationships with programmers? Perhaps this is the reason why Dish has to many ugly divorces with their business partners. Maybe that's why they are generally viewed as the Gabor sisters of Industry...look good on the outside, but 10-minutes into a binding relationship and you're wanting to choke the life out of their cheating, lying faces. Just call Josh Sapan at AMC and ask his opinion if you don't believe me.

In a nutshell, if AutoHop enables customers to effortlessly bypass commercials and thus rob CBS of advertising revenue (which I supposed they are entitled to do), CBS will have to make up this different by charging higher subscription fees. There is no doubt CBS would have charged a premium if Dish has disclosed that the release of AutoHop was imminent. We shall see...

If they were negotiating in good faith then these networks would be disclosing what rates they are actually getting from each provider during these discussions

 

[mike123abc]

I side with DISH on this. If autohop is banned than make the FF and skip options banned too.

I suspect that the networks would have fought the FF and skip at the time they were introduced on cable and satellite boxes if they had known what the outcome would be.... Too late now, viewers would blame the networks. Automatic commercial skipping is a new thing to be fought before it gains a large foothold and the consumer demands it.

 

[riffjim4069]

I don't think I agree with one thing in that post. But not in a mean way!! (Ok one thing - I did think Dish acted foolishly with AMC over the VOOM lawsuit) It's just I am looking at this from a completely different perspective. Just to pick one thing - Dish does not know - or care - if it affects CBS advertisers. They have no obligation to try and determine what CBS might find objectionable. They did not hide they had the technology, only according to CBS that it was vague. Well CBS should be suing their lawyers then for not asking more questions......

It all depends on the contract language and what happened (i.e., what was asked and what was answered) and what materials facts were or should have been disclosed during the due-diligence phase. We simply don't have enough information at this point. Dish may be squeaky clean and CBS is having a hissy-fit because they lacked foresight. However, they may also be victims of Dish/SATS chicanery if they did not negotiate in good faith and fully disclose all relevent information. I honestly don't know much about this case...probably because I cannot find anything posted in the e-courts (does anyone have a link?), but I am thinking that CBS could terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach with or without the court's intervention. I guess they're doing "things" the right way by going through the court and not just pulling the plug like Dish did with VOOM...minus the illegally terminating portion, fabricating a cover-up story, destroying evidence, and having executives lie in depositions and in the courtroom testimony. In other words, just another day working at the #2 hated company in America.

Anyway, there were a number folks arguing (and still do) in favor of Dish and against Tivo and Voom and AMC and Lifetime (and others) regardless of the volumes of evidence against Dish. I expect no less since the Dish Forum is skewed in favor of Dish and zealous members view the broadcasters/cablecasters/satcasters as being evil. I'm sure we would hear the exact opposite if this story were being told over at nab.org.

Finally, while Dish may not be under any legal obligation to care what happens to CBS, it is my experience that it is a good business practice to ensure (as much as possible) the success of business parners in order to create win-win outcomes. Charlie does not appear to roll this way...which is unfortunate IMO.

Any links to the court filings?

 

[GaryPen]

The one generation of copy could be argued that it's the actual broadcast and anything beyond that is not 1st generation.

No it can't.

 

[Ronnie-]

Just because you wish it to be so, doesn't make it so. I'm not sure why you feel the need to defend and join the broadcasters POV. I can only assume you are in either the broadcast or advertising industries

Bingo

 

[GaryPen]

Not really. If DirecTV, Comcast, and AT&T have this technology, you can bet they will band together against the networks.

OTOH, Comcast is also a major content provider, as are Time Warner and Cablevision, although less so. It will be interesting to see what happens in regard to ad-skipping on their delivery systems.

 

[GaryPen]

I suspect that the networks would have fought the FF and skip at the time they were introduced on cable and satellite boxes if they had known what the outcome would be....

They did.

 

[rapidturtle]

In my opinion, Dish should just let this go. (How come 9 times out of 10, it is always them fighting with someone?) Even if Dish wins and can use their auto skip feature, the networks are going to ask for more money from Dish when it comes time to sign a new contract. We already have the ability to skip commercials, so why stir the pot?

 

[wallyhts]

We need the guy who invented the Internet to get involved ya I know too late. But he sure did give GI and programmers lots of trouble. We need new laws that get rid of this crap. My view if it comes over the airwaves in the clear free use for all regardless of what they are doing with it.

I think CBS will lose dish will win. I hope during retrans agreement dish tells CBS to go hell and has some balls and says we're not paying anymore. It would take years and years to work it out in court.

The auto hop is not going to change the TV industry the internet will.

 

[GaryPen]

Personally, I prefer being able to record OTA/cable/sat programs to hdd and be able to skip commercials during playback as opposed to streaming the programming and being forced to sit through commercials embedded in the stream that can't be skipped.

For all of you wishing for a streaming/internet solution for watching TV, the latter is what you will have.

 

[Hall]

...if AutoHop enables customers to effortlessly bypass commercials and thus rob CBS of advertising revenue (which I supposed they are entitled to do)...

If CBS wins and AutoHop is eliminated, can we ask that CBS (and all networks) stop product-placement advertising ?

 

[dare2be]

For all of you wishing for a streaming/internet solution for watching TV, the latter is what you will have.

I still record my Hulu and Netflix streams to a HDD for my own trick playback or archival.

 

[riffjim4069]

We need the guy who invented the Internet to get involved ya I know too late. But he sure did give GI and programmers lots of trouble. We need new laws that get rid of this crap. My view if it comes over the airwaves in the clear free use for all regardless of what they are doing with it.

I think CBS will lose dish will win. I hope during retrans agreement dish tells CBS to go hell and has some balls and says we're not paying anymore. It would take years and years to work it out in court.

The auto hop is not going to change the TV industry the internet will.

I'll put my money on CBS, FBC and NBC on this one. It's only a matter of time before a judge rules (East or West Coast cases) that Dish's Primetime Anytime/AutoHop duo violates the owner's copyrights and/or they breached their agreement with CBS by not disclosing the Auto Hop feature and upcoming deployment to circumvents CBS' advertizing stream when this information was reguested. Regardless, even if Dish were to somehow win these cases, you can bet your sweet bippy that future agreements will include specific and detailed informaiton forbidding the use of Primetime Anytime/AutoHop technology.

In a nutshell:

- Dish will most likely lose in the short-term
- Dish will almost certailny lose in the long-term

We shall see...

 

[GaryPen]

I still record my Hulu and Netflix streams to a HDD for my own trick playback or archival.

That does add an extra step or two, and reduces streaming's ondemand convenience somewhat.

 

[dare2be]

That does add an extra step or two, and reduces streaming's ondemand convenience somewhat.

No different than waiting 15 minutes to chase play a live sat program so that you can skip past the commercials. You get the convenience of on-demand without the headaches.

Having my own copies of streamed content is truly on-demand. Regular on-demand should be renamed on-availability.

 

[GaryPen]

I'll put my money on CBS, FBC and NBC on this one. It's only a matter of time before a judge rules (East or West Coast cases) that Dish's Primetime Anytime/AutoHop duo violates the owner's copyrights and/or they breached their agreement with CBS by not disclosing the Auto Hop feature and upcoming deployment to circumvents CBS' advertizing stream when this information was reguested. Regardless, even if Dish were to somehow win these cases, you can bet your sweet bippy that future agreements will include specific and detailed informaiton forbidding the use of Primetime Anytime/AutoHop technology.

In a nutshell:

- Dish will most likely lose in the short-term
- Dish will almost certailny lose in the long-term

We shall see...

I wouldn't care if Dish lost this one, and auto-hop technology went away, if it was only limited to auto-hop. I have no problem using the 30-sec skip.

But, and this is a big but, it might set a precedent leading to the elimination of commercial skipping technology of any kind, which would include the simple 30-sec skip, and eventually even limit time-shifting, such as limits on how long the recording can be stored. And, that I can't abide.

But, with the deregulation and corporatization of America, it is entirely possible, unless we voice strong opposition, such as was done with SOPA. Believe it or not, our government is still scared of its citizens, if the people in charge of it think they're gonna lose their phony baloney jobs at the next election.

 

[GaryPen]

No different than waiting 15 minutes to chase play a live sat program so that you can skip past the commercials. You get the convenience of on-demand without the headaches.

Having my own copies of streamed content is truly on-demand. Regular on-demand should be renamed on-availability.

Is the software programmable to automate the process, like setting timers on a DVR?

 

[dare2be]

Yes, but the nature of on-demand streaming is that you initiate the playback of the program yourself, so there's no real need for timer recording when it comes to chase-play or archiving of on-demand streaming, except for instant timer recording (30-minute intervals).