Attention: We need your help!

[jayelem]

Then he gets the idea that he could sell this equipment and starts to really get the word out with advertisement and such. Then it gets big enough that it catches the eye of someone at "Let's Gouge The Hell Out of Them Cable/Programming Company" and they decide they need to do something about these people "stealing" their programming. Enter encryption. Isn't that about what happened with the programming we used to get on c-band?

Stealing , I'd call it eavesdropping at best.

If it wasn't for companies like Sadoun and Satellite AV along with some of our other sponsors providig a service, what would FTA be like.

The question may be , Is FTA ready to be pushed into the Mainstream ?

At most the biggest headlines have been about FTA receivers defeating Pay satellite TV encryption , we may have not been greatly noticed and it's possible that most in the FTA hobby want to keep it that way in fear that we could lose our privileges.

 

[mikekohl]

Cable companies stealing signals was not the main reason that HBO and others scrambled. They had the legal means to sue non-payers operating as otherwise legitimate cable providers. The bigger problem was hotels and motels that not only stole the premium signals, but some had the audacity to advertise HBO as a part of their service with the rooms. Commercial but off-the-radar use of such signals killed it for all of us.

This is well documented in a 900+ page book written last year by Bob Cooper, and available for sale on his website. Look for the words "Television's Pirates" at Home Page | Far North Cablevision Ltd
A history of what went right and wrong during the first satellite boom of the early 1980s. History seems to repeat itself again and again, so some lessons could be learned by reading this fascinating account of our early satellite industry.

While individual events of Free-To-Air signals being scrambled because someone spoke too loudly and a broadcast executive panicked and ordered the switch pulled--are quite rare, it is a dangerous trend for any channel that has not publicly announced that they encourage home viewing of their free signals. TV executives can and do sit in their ivory towers, mostly unaware about how their network signals are transmitted to the world. But if you poke 'em in the eye publicly with the news that you can watch it for free while someone else is charging for the same signal on another delivery system, what else can they do but take immediate steps to protect their investment? Some channels go to a Free-To-Air mode initially with the intention of eventually going to a subscription basis; using the free access as a way to get folks in the habit of watching that channel, and then setting up a toll gate when it is deemed there are enough potential paying viewers to run a good business. Wild feeds are of the variety that should not be publicly commented on---due to the unknown factor of whether or not a higher executive cares. Make them too public and bad things happen. If Mr Buckner and others wish to promote their business on the basis of identifying in detail what is in the clear, it is to the long term detriment of those signals staying in the clear. As has been said earlier, they are preaching to the choir, so very few new customers are listening on satellite---maybe a few converts can be made from streaming audio. It's up to this community whether to support companies that are making a profit from selling such hardware while unnecessarily risking the loss of some channels by too much visibility.

 

[Tron]

Very well put, Mike! I'll check out that book, sounds like an interesting read. Unfortunately, corporate greed controls most television in the United States. When someone spouts off about how "X, Y, and Z channels can be picked up for free instead of paying", someone may take notice and change that.

I have no problem with well-documented, 24-7 channels being discussed on any show. Galaxy 10 is a prime example. Heck, we even have a member here who works in a prominent position at Equity. I am not in any way for censorship, but in some cases, loose lips sink ships. It is the specific information on backhauls and, in particular, sporting events which are otherwise only available via PPV, which can and will lead to trouble.

 

[turbosat]

Well said Mike Kohl. (I remember Bob Cooper from the olden days lol)
I think until certain Pay-TV providers get serious about their signal security, nothing is to be gained by making media noise about what true
free to air really is. An entire industry has developed around signal theft, on this continent, so widespread now they talk openly about it on the internet, advertise "FTA bins" for sale on ebay, and boast of receivers that hold "9 day EPG", do automatic switch detection, and can auto-update their "software" when connected to a dsl line. I enjoy this hobby, but I'm afraid the signal theft problem is going to be a giant black eye for the real hobbyists for quite a while.

 

[john green]

The air is clear and I feel good. Again there is NO BOYCOTT on DMSI products, so feel free to visit your DMSI reseller and buy away, I can recemmond them all except for one, and I am not going to mention that one as I don't feel like like giving him a free plug. Merry Christmas to ALL!

You must mean the one I buy all my FTA equipment from and will continue to do so. He has never let me down.

 

[Van]

Looking over this whole thread I would have to sit on both sides of the fence. I agrea that making threats that can easily be taken as life threatening is a bad thing and shouldnt be tolerated if it was indead a threat on icebergs life. I can also respect not wanting any support of the instigaters business / radioshow as he had made it clear that he was going to use this sites podcasts with or without permission and then aparently trying to extort money out of this site.

What I cant do is condone a boycott of an advertiser right off the bat without first this sites administrator(s) talking with the advertiser(s) of the show to get their view on this incident as a whole.

One last question, if this was a threat on Icebergs life was the authorites notified to that end?

 

[Wescopc]

Cable companies stealing signals was not the main reason that HBO and others scrambled. They had the legal means to sue non-payers operating as otherwise legitimate cable providers. The bigger problem was hotels and motels that not only stole the premium signals, but some had the audacity to advertise HBO as a part of their service with the rooms. Commercial but off-the-radar use of such signals killed it for all of us.

I knew a guy that just drove around looking for big dishes at Motels. He was hired by the pay TV guys to find illegal users bust them (with a fine) and then sign them up - to make them legal monthly payers. But he was out of work when they scrambled everything.
Bob

 

[gpat]

mods remove please

 

[Van]

mods remove please

remove what and why? consider to that this thread was started by the head man as well.

 

[Mr Tony]

there was a spam post above gpats post which got nuked
Thats all that was for

 

[Tyralak]

there was a spam post above gpats post which got nuked
Thats all that was for

I thought we didn't delete posts here. Is there a spam exception?

 

[Pepper]

yes. i've seen the forums after a spam bot has done its work. Not pretty.

 

[Tron]

There was some spam from a business (term used loosely ) that was trying to sell jewelry here. Not only spam, but very off-topic.

 

[tdti1]

Well I just found this fools site, I can't beleave this, feeds that we take for granted and keep on the hush are now up on the web for the world to see, any hackers out there want to shut his site down?

 

[charper1]

One last question, if this was a threat on Icebergs life was the authorites notified to that end?

I highly doubt it was a death threat, but one aimed toward blocking access of some sort. A weak and empty threat too at beast.

 

[stogie5150]

Well I just found this fools site, I can't beleave this, feeds that we take for granted and keep on the hush are now up on the web for the world to see, any hackers out there want to shut his site down?

Woah now, lets not be irrational about this. I don't like it, you don't like it, but at the end of the day he can do what he wants. I certainly don't agree with Rick's stance, I believe in the axiom better safe than sorry, but he can do whatever he wants. I told him as such. There are folks that post HERE that vehemently deny that posting feeds in the open is a bad idea. I disagree. You do too. Its America. Live and let live.

And, for the record, I still go to his forum from time to time. Good info there sometimes, and nice folks. We don't agree on the feed thing, but that's it.

 

[Anole]

Can we please just close this thread and let it die?
It's way over due.