Dish broke the rules. Everyone lost their dns. Even the consumers who have a right to them. Will a smart or a dumb lawyer try a class action against Dish. Is this possible? Don't care either way but I am a customer who has a right for dns and is pretty upset with dish.
Class Action
- Thread starter ageism
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 13
- Views 3K
As stated for other things, Directv got sued for HDLITE - I am sure a lawyer would be happy to go after E* as many people have sizable amounts spent on equipment - and contracts.
Depending on the circumstances, a lawyer may or may not be able to solicit a lead Plaintiff (you) so you might need to contact one.
I would google the one handling the D* HDLITE suit as he is most likely versed on the ins and outs of satellite companies.
He'd probably love to go after Charlie as, in most cases, the lawyer is the one that gets the big bucks.
Depending on the circumstances, a lawyer may or may not be able to solicit a lead Plaintiff (you) so you might need to contact one.
I would google the one handling the D* HDLITE suit as he is most likely versed on the ins and outs of satellite companies.
He'd probably love to go after Charlie as, in most cases, the lawyer is the one that gets the big bucks.
I'll settle for lifetime of free locals (have to uplink first and supply all networks) and NO fees on any and all receivers. Any lawyers out there?
I've been a Dish customer since 1998. I miss the dns especially Leno that I was getting at 8:35 pm instead of 11:30 pm. But I knew that this would probably come to an end and now find that the world still turns. I thank Dish for the many years that I was able to watch the early shows out of New York and will continue to be a Dish customer.
Floyd Zimmerman
Your agreement with E* says that they reserve the right to make changes to the programming you receive at any time, regardless of its importance to you. That's a pretty cozy blanket that leaves little uncovered.
Ok, so heres my two cents, dish was giving all of you distant locals even though they knew they shouldn't be. So if all of you want to hate some one hate the courts that say that dish can't do that anymore. It's not dishes fault, they did what they did as long as they could and now all I hear is its dishes fault and its not, its the courts ruling so hate them congress bastards.
In no way did I mean that to be construed as E*-bashing. E* has complied with current DNS qualifying since around 2002. However, the court says that because they made a little screwup before that, starting around 1998, E* should pay the price. They were in the good at the time of the ruling but Dimitrouleas overlooked that.
Echostar or any other provider for that matter are not required to provide anyone with a distant network. They lost the ability to do so if they wanted to do it. The Dish consumer has not been denied any right or privilege because of Dish's action. The law does not give the consumer any rights, it only gave the provider the right to provide a service under certain circumstances.
BS - Read your first line "dish was giving all of you distant locals even though they knew they shouldn't be" so blame the courts and the congress bastards? Get real. I suppose you side with Bank Robbers because they need the money?
Not true. Dish refused to requalify everyone so they continued to break the law 2002 to present.
Dish even admits it in a round about way by offering OTA TV Antennas to the people that lost DNS service. If you truly were in a white area, that wouldnt work - think about it. As was documented around 50% of the people getting DNS were getting so illegally - and the offering of OTA antenna confirms that.
The judge didn't overlook anything. You did.
Lawyers go after retailers. Law firms go after corporations. Microsoft goes after everyone else.
Any intelligent service provider you deal with has a clause in their contracts which essentially say "we make you no guarantees the service you're signing up for will operate 100% of the time, may not be removed in the future, and we reserve the right to make any alterations including but not limited to discontinuation or suspension of said service at any time for any or no reason." I believe you'll find something similar in your contract paperwork or disclaimers.
In today's age frivilous lawsuits don't survive. The only lawsuits which tend to hold merit are willful damages (someone lied to you) or actual harm (perceived harm only applies in sexual harassment cases, do try to remember that.) That narrows down who you can sue and what for by quite a bit. And what's really great about all this, is if you sue, and it is found frivilous is that you can be countersued. I know how much you could get out of DISH, but how much could they get out of you?
Any intelligent service provider you deal with has a clause in their contracts which essentially say "we make you no guarantees the service you're signing up for will operate 100% of the time, may not be removed in the future, and we reserve the right to make any alterations including but not limited to discontinuation or suspension of said service at any time for any or no reason." I believe you'll find something similar in your contract paperwork or disclaimers.
In today's age frivilous lawsuits don't survive. The only lawsuits which tend to hold merit are willful damages (someone lied to you) or actual harm (perceived harm only applies in sexual harassment cases, do try to remember that.) That narrows down who you can sue and what for by quite a bit. And what's really great about all this, is if you sue, and it is found frivilous is that you can be countersued. I know how much you could get out of DISH, but how much could they get out of you?
Last edited:
That fact is, just like the DVR ruling, Dish might have a contract saying that in the fine print, but they also have a Company Spokesperson saying they were confident they would prevail.
Remember Directv has similar clauses - and they expected the class action suit against them for HD-LITE to be tossed by the courts.
They too were up for an unpleasant surprised.
I say go for it! Be the lead plantiff! What have you got to loose?
Remember Directv has similar clauses - and they expected the class action suit against them for HD-LITE to be tossed by the courts.
They too were up for an unpleasant surprised.
I say go for it! Be the lead plantiff! What have you got to loose?
The DirecTv suit is not a class-action suit yet. The Court in CA ruled that DirecTv could not make such a major change in it's customer agreement, requiring arbitration, just by adding a flyer to a customer bill. The petition to make the suit class-action has not been heard. Nor has the case about whether the HD service is what is advertised by DirecTv.
Brilliant!! All those "illegal distant subs that e* signed up unite..Lets sue e* for letting us break the law that says we cant have distants!!
Go for it and be the lead plaintiff, and when you win and get free locals for life for everyone, we all will be happy - with the $7 increase in the regular programming packages. 
The lawyer, or law firm, is the only winner here.
The lawyer, or law firm, is the only winner here.
