I suggested this a while back as an alternative to losing the distant nets. Just "move" to a service address in New York,L.A., Chicago ,Denver and you will keep your distants since they are on conus beam .
SatelliteGuys Makes The Court Case
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 251
- Views 24K
I suggested this a while back as an alternative to losing the distant nets. Just "move" to a service address in New York,L.A., Chicago ,Denver and you will keep your distants since they are on conus beam .
So I would need to amend my suggested statement to:
"As of 11:59pm EST, 12/1/2006 Echostar stopped selling distant networks to all subscribers and issued commands to every satellite receiver to stop receiving network signals outside their designated market area as defined by their service address."
I was struck by the imprecise nature of Mr. Povenmire's statement. There is absolutely no way for Dish Network to know with any certainty that they "disconnected" every customer from distant networks. There are bound to be certain receivers that have been hacked and beyond E*'s control or customers who have service addresses that don't match the physical address of the receivers.
But I suppose this problem is not unique to distant networks. If I lived in a crappy secondary DMA and worked in a nearby city. The spot beams likely overlap. I might give my work address as my service address. With VOIP I could even have a home phone with a prefix in my work city.
Let's pretend their authorization system was really, really simple. Every account has the following 'flags':
DNS-W
DNS-E
If you get one or the other, your account (and smart-card) has this:
DNS-W 1
DNS-E 1
They can do a system-wide change to:
DNS-W 0
DNS-E 0
Obviously 1 = on and 0 = off. Think they don't have something similar ?? How do they enable a free Showtime weekend or the various previews they offer all the time ??
If they made a change like this, that's all they can do. Hacked receivers simply can't be considered as they're "beyond E*'s control", as you say. In the case of people who have "moved", so long as they moved somewhere other than LA or NYC, they're not getting distant nets. The smart people who "move", move to either LA or NYC.
DNS-W
DNS-E
If you get one or the other, your account (and smart-card) has this:
DNS-W 1
DNS-E 1
They can do a system-wide change to:
DNS-W 0
DNS-E 0
Obviously 1 = on and 0 = off. Think they don't have something similar ?? How do they enable a free Showtime weekend or the various previews they offer all the time ??
If they made a change like this, that's all they can do. Hacked receivers simply can't be considered as they're "beyond E*'s control", as you say. In the case of people who have "moved", so long as they moved somewhere other than LA or NYC, they're not getting distant nets. The smart people who "move", move to either LA or NYC.
Long day - can't type complete sentences.
The NAB is going to have to deal with the whole designated market area problem sooner or later. The technology already exists to "place shift" broadcasts. Someone will come up with a way to do this on peer-to-peer networks, bypassing a central server operator that NAB can sue or shut down.
I think the broadcasters and the networks need to rethink their business models. The DMA system and the exclusive franchises granted local network affiliates goes back to the 1940s before anyone thought about the internet or satellite TV.
The NAB is going to have to deal with the whole designated market area problem sooner or later. The technology already exists to "place shift" broadcasts. Someone will come up with a way to do this on peer-to-peer networks, bypassing a central server operator that NAB can sue or shut down.
I think the broadcasters and the networks need to rethink their business models. The DMA system and the exclusive franchises granted local network affiliates goes back to the 1940s before anyone thought about the internet or satellite TV.
The main reason they had to use the recap from satguys is (according to the court filings) a request was made to the E* lawyer for a copy of the actual chat and the defranco loop on ch240 and they never got a response. Since E* failed to furnish the actual video the oppistion had no choice but to us the recap thread.
I would think that anything from this site is inadmissable in a court of law. PPT slides can be doctored, as can MP3s. It is wholely outside of Echostar's control what is posted here. Dfergie does a great job handling the recaps, but face it, access to a good computer nowadays pretty much invalidates any "photographic" evidence.
So, why would Decisionmark stop providing their service to NPS? Fear of being tied to any possible contempt penalties? "I'm sure DirecTV has a nice contract with Decisionmark; it would be a shame if it wasn't renewed..."
Oh, did I say that out loud?
So, why would Decisionmark stop providing their service to NPS? Fear of being tied to any possible contempt penalties? "I'm sure DirecTV has a nice contract with Decisionmark; it would be a shame if it wasn't renewed..."
Oh, did I say that out loud?
LoL! Sorry some are incurable. If they can't get their fix here there is a group of Canadians that will be happy to provide them what they need. I weened myself off DNS by adding a 622 and Portland HD locals, now I'm an HD-aholic.
NightRyder
That is exactly how I got off of them; NY and LA feeds seemed silly when they were in SD and the Denver locals were in HD. Such a dramatic difference I cancelled them almost immediately. Still.. there are times when I miss not checking into the news on either east or left coasts.... and I recall spending almost of 9/11/01 glued to WABC out of NY. It's perspective was totally different than the national broadcast.
Okay, my bad. It looks like Decisionmark is big enough that they wouldn't be bullied about by DirecTV. NAB, on the other hand, is another matter. Much of Decisionmark's business comes from Broadcast TV stations. Hmmm...
I would think that anything from this site is inadmissable in a court of law. PPT slides can be doctored, as can MP3s. It is wholely outside of Echostar's control what is posted here. Dfergie does a great job handling the recaps, but face it, access to a good computer nowadays pretty much invalidates any "photographic" evidence.
So, why would Decisionmark stop providing their service to NPS? Fear of being tied to any possible contempt penalties? "I'm sure DirecTV has a nice contract with Decisionmark; it would be a shame if it wasn't renewed..."
Oh, did I say that out loud?
Its a good evidentiary question; but wow, imagine the work involved doctoring the PPT and then broadcasting it on a tv to get a screen shot, which is what it looks like, and do that within a few hours.
I suspect that the reality is they saw the recap, which was available within hours of the broadcast, and then just copied it as part of the contempt filing. The Court can always order E* to produce a copy of the actual tape they showed at a later date.
Agreed, and I fully expect that will be exactly what happens.
Unfortunately, this may be the death knell for the "Charlie Chat" as we know it. I considered it one of the main differences between DishNetwork and DirecTV. I mean, can you imagine some GM/Hughes/NewCorp exec (over the years, that is) sitting there in their pinstripe suit and power tie talking to "Mabel in Oceanview, IA" about how to set up credit card autopay?
Last edited:
In ref to various posts about this thread, other threads, screen shots, etc...
The way I read the Plaintiff's filing last week, was nothing was being entered into evidence, because the plaintiff knew that it wasn't admissable. However, they did want to use these items to show that there appeared to be cause for a fishing trip, i.e., call Charlie and Symposium to court so that the plaintiff can ask them the following:
- Charlie, "Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?" (Response) Yes, but let it be known that I'm only allowed to answer the questions asked to me.
- Charlie, "Do you have an agreement with NPS?" (Response) Yes.
- Charlie, "Are you selling satellite services to NPS?" (Response) Yes.
- Charlie, "Is NPS planning to and/or currently selling DNS to Dish customers"? (Response) Yes.
Then the Plaintiff's Florida lawyers says to the judge, "Your Honor, I respectfully request that you tell Mr. Charlie that he just admitted he is guilty as hell and to bend over and kiss his butt good buy, and to take his transponders with him!"
Last edited:
NPS call 1
Just called NPS again told them I heard that they sell DNS and that I was a SKY Angel sub and wanted to sub to DNS. The rep asked me if I also subbed to E*. I asked her why and she told me that at the current time NPS is only selling to E* customers.
Call two:
Called NPS and told them that I wanted to see if I qualified for DNS the rep asked me for my phone number I gave it to him and was told that I am not eligible. I asked why and was again told that since my number is not in the system I am not a qualified sub. This time I asked what makes me a qualified sub and the rep actually told me that E* is providing them with the info. I then told the rep that I live in a true white area and asked if they could check my address. He told me that he could not do that. I was told that E* sends them the subs and the ones that NPS qualifies they put in the system. He told me if I was in fact in a true white area then they should get my info from E* soon. That they are getting more and more info from dish and should have all eligible subs within 10-15 days. I then asked him if he new about the agreement between dish and nps and he said that he did not that he was just a csr. I then told him that I receive locals from E* and he told me that if I receive locals from E* then I WILL not be getting DNS from NPS because it would violate the law and that is what got E* in trouble to begin with. I then asked him if NPS as an independent company provides Locals other than DNS and he told me no they only provide DNS. So I asked if I dropped my locals with E* would they then sell me locals and he actually told me it all depends on if I am in a white area and E* gives them my info. I also asked him about non E* customers recving DNS from NPS and was told no at the current time they only sell to active E* customers. I thanked him and hung up.
These guys are f**king up big time. All it takes is for one of the CBS lawyers to call NPS just the way I did and the Lawyers would have admissible proof that E* and NPS are NOT following the argreement that was given to the courts. Do not expect this deal to last!
Just called NPS again told them I heard that they sell DNS and that I was a SKY Angel sub and wanted to sub to DNS. The rep asked me if I also subbed to E*. I asked her why and she told me that at the current time NPS is only selling to E* customers.
Call two:
Called NPS and told them that I wanted to see if I qualified for DNS the rep asked me for my phone number I gave it to him and was told that I am not eligible. I asked why and was again told that since my number is not in the system I am not a qualified sub. This time I asked what makes me a qualified sub and the rep actually told me that E* is providing them with the info. I then told the rep that I live in a true white area and asked if they could check my address. He told me that he could not do that. I was told that E* sends them the subs and the ones that NPS qualifies they put in the system. He told me if I was in fact in a true white area then they should get my info from E* soon. That they are getting more and more info from dish and should have all eligible subs within 10-15 days. I then asked him if he new about the agreement between dish and nps and he said that he did not that he was just a csr. I then told him that I receive locals from E* and he told me that if I receive locals from E* then I WILL not be getting DNS from NPS because it would violate the law and that is what got E* in trouble to begin with. I then asked him if NPS as an independent company provides Locals other than DNS and he told me no they only provide DNS. So I asked if I dropped my locals with E* would they then sell me locals and he actually told me it all depends on if I am in a white area and E* gives them my info. I also asked him about non E* customers recving DNS from NPS and was told no at the current time they only sell to active E* customers. I thanked him and hung up.
These guys are f**king up big time. All it takes is for one of the CBS lawyers to call NPS just the way I did and the Lawyers would have admissible proof that E* and NPS are NOT following the argreement that was given to the courts. Do not expect this deal to last!
"...while Canadians have and still continue to watch , all the networks they want from America...."
Oh yeah? Try subscribing, as a Canadian, to D* or E* with a Canadian billing and service address. Canada is trying to keep their culture "pure" and defend their local providers.
And if Decisionmark refuses service to NPS, and E* prevails, there are serious liability concerns about that Decisionmark decision.
Oh yeah? Try subscribing, as a Canadian, to D* or E* with a Canadian billing and service address. Canada is trying to keep their culture "pure" and defend their local providers.
And if Decisionmark refuses service to NPS, and E* prevails, there are serious liability concerns about that Decisionmark decision.
It appears that E* may have prequalified the subscribers to NPS as elligible for DNS or not. If so, they may have used Decisionmark's data in a way that was not allowed in the contract betwen E* and Decisionmark.
Not to mention the "Acting in concert" part.
A blanket statement like this is foolish. Whether or not something is admissible is determined by the rules. While it is unlikely that much from satguys would be admissible (due to relevance, if nothing else), there is nothing that would prohibit, in general, information from a website from being used*. As for the board owner turning over personal information - if he's looking at the cell door you can bet that he's going to give you up.
*Perhaps you meant "not everything is admissible" as opposed to "nothing is admissible"?
*Perhaps you meant "not everything is admissible" as opposed to "nothing is admissible"?
My Replay Crashed that I did the ECC from so the source HDD's are wiped clean... (replaced IDE cable today) no evidence here...
