Court Orders Dish to Drop ALL Distant Networks

[nitstalker]

I see an FTA Reciever in my future

 

[Greg Bimson]

I'm thinking the type of class action civil suits that could come out of this and the Tivo ruling probably have the potential to bury Dish.

And Greg, I gotta tell ya, you're a patient man.

My concern is always that people believe they have some "right". The rights people (and corporations) have are given in the Constitution. The "rights" given by laws are subject to case law and judicial review. And courts have time and time again made sure the rights are assigned "properly". Here, the rights of the local stations are more important because they own the licenses for broadcast, while the copyright owners own the license for the material.

According to the Appeals Court, Dish Network wilfully violated the law. The remedies are spelled out in the law. The remedies set forth in the law doesn't seize any of Dish Network's property or contracts. Therefore, one could believe that the Appeals Court ruling will remain intact.

So, the question is if the Circuit Court issues an injunction, whether or not an appeal can be heard. I would suspect it is fast-tracked, as the Appeals Court has already ruled on the matter.

No, I am not a lawyer.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

I remember reading back in 2004 that both E* and D* granted waivers to presidential candidates, allowing their campaigns to receive all locals and DNS. So whereever they were, they would get all channels physically being transmitted to that location.

This would be a nice flag to have turned on in your account.

 

[riffjim4069]

Personally, I find that Greg has an excellent understanding of local broadcasting issues and the legal aspects affecting their carriage and retransmisison. Now, regarding folks about to lose their distant networks...I feel for you. I really do! However, it is clear that Dish Network has [for years] continued to violate the law, which left the courts little recourse other than to order a shutdown distant networks to all their customers.

Perhaps it's time to take a closer look at DirecTV and jump on board that class action lawsuit I see coming. Customers should direct their anger at Dish Network for their continued, and willful, violation of the law and not the FCC, Courts, or broadcasters who are playing by the rules. If people don't like the rules...get involved with your legislators and change them.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Wow!!! What a callous attack. There are many Dish customers that are not in any local area. A customer 1/2 way between Lubbock and Amarillo is without any cable or over the air TV. The only choice is satellite. Whoever makes the rules don't say which local Dish should give them. Dish did their job and gave both cities locals, but still cannot satisfy the rules. Maybe cold people like you wrote these dumb rules.So Dish gives them distant networks. Now this new ruling takes those away. And you say it deserves them right. I find that attitude quite offensive, even heartless. I believe the judges in Atlanta made the same heartless, uninformed opinion.

The whole problem here is that "Dish gives them distant networks". However, Dish Network, according to the court ruling, does not have any backup documentation to support how customers were given distant networks. They didn't provide their burden of proof in determining the qualfication of their subscribers, for a government-mandated copyright license. They didn't follow the terms and conditions of the license they were given.

With respect to TV service we are now seeing a privledged class and a repressed class. I believe I am fighting that repression and you are for the oppressors.

Charlie Ergen, is that you?

Here. I'll make this easy. Call the local ABC affiliate in Lubbock. Tell them you want their signal. They'll say "put up an antenna". You'll say your are in New Hampshire. They'll tell you they aren't available in New Hampshire. They have contracts to be on local cable systems, DirecTV, and Dish Network, but they don't make contracts with end users. And they don't make their signal available nationwide.

And the copyright holders of the programs that ABC in Lubbock broadcasts prefer it that way.

No, instead, people want a much larger government handout, by seizing the property of others and giving it to you in the way you want it. Just be careful when someone comes by and wants your property.

 

[bcope9]

However, WSAZ in Huntington/Charleston, WV was at one time receivable in Cuba, last time I checked that is not in the DMA. The FCC cut the power when more stations came online.
700WLW can be picked up almost anywhere, and I don't think that too many advertisers care.
Really you cannot control how atmospeheric skip will run, so Lubbock stations could be picked up in New Hampshire, given the right conditions.

 

[roadrhino]

Here's my question ....

When will the distant networks be dropped?

As far as I can tell, not yet.

 

[Clancy]

Personally, I find that Greg has an excellent understanding of local broadcasting issues and the legal aspects affecting their carriage and retransmisison. Now, regarding folks about to lose their distant networks...I feel for you. I really do! However, it is clear that Dish Network has [for years] continued to violate the law, which left the courts little recourse other than to order a shutdown distant networks to all their customers.

Perhaps it's time to take a closer look at DirecTV and jump on board that class action lawsuit I see coming. Customers should direct their anger at Dish Network for their continued, and willful, violation of the law and not the FCC, Courts, or broadcasters who are playing by the rules. If people don't like the rules...get involved with your legislators and change them.

In your first paragraph, you incorrectly stated that the courts ordered a shutdown of distant networks to all their customers.

I read in the court ruling : Echostar is permitted to deliver so-called distant signals only to homes that receive no other stations over the air.

If I misread , please clarify.

 

[Greg Bimson]

However, WSAZ in Huntington/Charleston, WV was at one time receivable in Cuba, last time I checked that is not in the DMA. The FCC cut the power when more stations came online.
700WLW can be picked up almost anywhere, and I don't think that too many advertisers care.
Really you cannot control how atmospeheric skip will run, so Lubbock stations could be picked up in New Hampshire, given the right conditions.

And every person in the US can throw up an antenna to pick up whatever is available for a "primary transmission", the one generated through a station's OTA transmission. The issue here is how copyright law must be changed or followed in order to have other entities rebroadcast those same channels.

Cable gained their rights for rebroadcast through a copyright exemption given by the Supreme Court in the United Artists v. Fortnightly case in 1968.

Satellite gained their rights for rebroadcasting certain local channels by the original SHVA in 1988, through a law passed by Congress and signed by President Reagan. The local-into-local provisions and some of the distant network provisions were signed into law in November, 1999 by President Clinton.

These all exempt copyright law in some way, shape or form.

 

[mikew]

In your first paragraph, you incorrectly stated that the courts ordered a shutdown of distant networks to all their customers.

I read in the court ruling : Echostar is permitted to deliver so-called distant signals only to homes that receive no other stations over the air.

If I misread , please clarify.

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313671.pdf

Start on page 43 of the 44 page ruling. It states...

"Because, as discussed, we come to the unavoidable conclusion that EchoStar engaged in a "pattern or practice" of SHVA violations, we hold that the district court is required to issue a nationwide permanent injunction barring the provision of distant network programming pursuant to the Act's statutory license."

It doesn't get any clearer than that. Why don't you folks read the ruling instead of trying to read things into this thread? It is plain and simple. Once the injunction is instituted, Distant Networks are GONE for EVERYBODY on Dish Network.

 

[Greg Bimson]

When will the distant networks be dropped?

When the District Court reexamines the case. We don't know when it will be placed on the docket.

I read in the court ruling : Echostar is permitted to deliver so-called distant signals only to homes that receive no other stations over the air.

If I misread , please clarify.

One only needs to look at the last paragraph of the last page of the ruling:

For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part, and we REMAND the case to the district court for the entry of a nationwide permanent injunction as mandated by the Act.[/b]

In other words, ALL distant network service to be terminated on Dish Network, irregardless of white area, waiver, or grandfathering.

 

[Clancy]

And every person in the US can throw up an antenna to pick up whatever is available for a "primary transmission", the one generated through a station's OTA transmission. The issue here is how copyright law must be changed or followed in order to have other entities rebroadcast those same channels.

Cable gained their rights for rebroadcast through a copyright exemption given by the Supreme Court in the United Artists v. Fortnightly case in 1968.

Satellite gained their rights for rebroadcasting certain local channels by the original SHVA in 1988, through a law passed by Congress and signed by President Reagan. The local-into-local provisions and some of the distant network provisions were signed into law in November, 1999 by President Clinton.

These all exempt copyright law in some way, shape or form.

Greg, I suggest you come down out of your celestial cloud and visit America.
You stated in your first sentence that every person in the US can throw up an antenna to pick up whatever is available for a primary transmission, the one generated through a station's OTA transmission.

After you have seen America like others have, you will appreciate that there are a lot of areas due to topography or just plain outside the erp zone of any broadcast antenna. Satellite distant networks is their only recourse.

 

[mikew]

Clancy...
Second post in a row that you take out of context. He was replying to a post stating that, with an OTA antenna and the right conditions for skip, you can pick up a Lubbock station on the East Coast.

Don't shoot the messenger...if this really upsets you, complain to Dish!

 

[Mr Tony]

what is different between Canada and here on "copyright"?
you can time shift up there with NO SyndEX rules, DMA's, must carries, or cash for carriage but here, it's about copyright and these Bullsh!t rules. For those that don't know, in Canada they carry the major four from the U.S. using east and west coast feeds along with A Channel, Global, CTV, City TV and CBC and other Canadian broadcasters broadcasting the same programming just at different times in some cases. Copyright is actually held with the network itself, they just distibute a product to there affiliates to air. So again where does copyright come into play when we should have a choice? It's not about copyright, it's about advertisers, they don't want something outside of the market competeing against them, so they pushed to remove the competition is what it boiled down too. If we lined NAB's pockets with enough cash, they would probably swing our way.

um, actually there is Syndex rules there. They're called simsubs
Also, the stations that are not owned by the Network (CBC/CTV in Thunder Bay, CTV in Kenora, CBC/CTV in Lloydminster, CBC Terrace & Prince George) Expressvu blocks all similar programming in that time zone for people in those areas. So Thunder Bay gets blacked out on CBC Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal when the same item is on. StarChoice doesn't do the local blackouts and they follow the correct simsub rules (If you are in the Grade B of a Canadian station that is showing a program at the same time as a show in the states, they simsub. Thats why Toronto has simsubs and Fort Frances, ON doesn't)

In Canada, watch a O&O affiliate. The commercials are exactly the same. On the affiliates, there are different commercials.

 

[bcope9]

Copyright laws being changed, what is exactly being copyprotected? The signal or the content.

And actually, not everyone in the US can throw up an antenna and get a signal. Mountains, hills and apartments kinda reduce that.
If a person wants a Distant Network Signal, let them pay for it.

 

[waltinvt]

Some of you are starting to rile me a little.

Don't for a minute assume because Greg doesn't have many posts here that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's been explaining SHVA, SHVIA, SHVERA, and copywrite law to us lunkheads for longer than I can remember and I know of no one any better versed on the subject.

He's kind enough to take the time to explain this stuff to us, so just because you don't like the law (I don't) or you're PO'd at Dish for getting us into this mess (I am) or you're upset with the FCC, NAB, congress or your local affiliate (all of the above), you don't need to direct your frustration at Greg. I for one am glad to have him here.

 

[mikew]

Copyright laws being changed, what is exactly being copyprotected? The signal or the content.

And actually, not everyone in the US can throw up an antenna and get a signal. Mountains, hills and apartments kinda reduce that.
If a person wants a Distant Network Signal, let them pay for it.

Copyright laws are not being changed. Satellite providers were granted permission to provide distant network programming to people like you who cannot get the programming off the air. Dish didn't follow the rules that gave them permission and the punishment, defined by Congress, is to no longer allow them to provide distant networks to its subscribers.

Obviously, you cannot copyright a signal. Network programming is what is being protected for the local affiliates who pay to exclusively broadcast that programming in their local market.

 

[Tampa8]

Some of you are starting to rile me a little.

Don't for a minute assume because Greg doesn't have many posts here that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's been explaining SHVA, SHVIA, SHVERA, and copywrite law to us lunkheads for longer than I can remember and I know of no one any better versed on the subject.

He's kind enough to take the time to explain this stuff to us, so just because you don't like the law (I don't) or you're PO'd at Dish for getting us into this mess (I am) or you're upset with the FCC, NAB, congress or your local affiliate (all of the above), you don't need to direct your frustration at Greg. I for one am glad to have him here.

Well said.

I am a long time Dish subscriber(1998 approx). I have generally supported/defended Dish and Charlie in most everything except when they introduce buggy equipment. They have some weird marketing and fees I wish they didn't have, but very happy overall with their service.
I cannot defend them if the information we are getting is true that they are careless in who gets distants to such an extent that a court finds they will take the right away to carry any distants. Because as Greg as some others have pointed out that is the law. We don't like it, Dish doesn't like it, for all we know the judges don't like it. I stand to lose distants and I'm not happy at all, but I blame Dish. I have them legally and may very well lose that.
It does narrow the difference in services and in fact my cable company carries two networks out of area. (significantly viewed - Boston) And they have the networks and Red Sox in HD so I am going to have to take a long look at that. Not sure I want to leave a service I am happy with but it makes me think. Maybe some revelation will come along and make Dish look a little better in this mess, I hope so.

(Just to explain - the Hartford stations rarely carry anything "extra" such as the 1/2 hour pre show to American Idol as some other Fox stations did, and especially WFSB pre-emps shows with a local show or Evangelist at times.)

 

[BigFella]

No, I am not a lawyer.

Wow - You sure had me convinced otherwise! While I hate the fact (and I've resigned myself to it) that I'm going to lose my NY distants, you've given me a clear understanding of why they're going away.

I live in the LA DMA but made the choice to drop my locals to get grandfathered into NY DNS a year or so ago. When they do go away, I'll be fortunate enough to subscribe to LA locals I guess (OTA is not an option due to local terrain), but it sure sucks that I'll lose the ability to timeshift and my (New Yorker) wife won't be able to see the stations from her hometown .

FTA or the "Canadian solution" may be in the future to resolve my timeshifting problem. However, my wife, my neighbors and my HOA will sure be unhappy if I have to put up a fourth dish on the roof!

 

[Jamey K]

Some of you are starting to rile me a little.
(snip), you don't need to direct your frustration at Greg. I for one am glad to have him here.

So am I. I'm glad you are here. I'm glad I'm here and Greg seems to have the patience of Job. But he seems to be able to take care of himself.

I'm taken with the level of frustration that people are feeling. This is funny: I was on the phone with my congressman's Press Secretary, about all of this, when the capitol was shut down. They lost interest in me very quickly.