Deal with NPS to "save" distants on DISH!

[dishrich]

Probably NPS could offer this if they chose to do so.

You know right after I answered his question, I totally forgot - NPS DOES uplink another station that is NOT considered a grandfathered superstation. They uplink KTVD-MYTV out of Denver, as well as PBS stations KRMA & KBDI in their Denver 8 network package.

I have always wondered how NPS is getting by with this, but since ONLY 4DTV C-band customers can sub to them, nobody probably notices that should...

 

[Tampa8]

Those of you agreeing with Greg on this, let me ask you, do you think that Sky Angel is "actively working" with E*? Sky Angel is providing a service that E* can't, religious programming beyond TBN, and no money other than leasing fees are going from Sky Angel towards E*. Why is this NPS arrangement any different?

I hate to agree with Greg, but there is a difference the way you worded it. Dish is not under a court order to stop providing religious programming they can if they want to. So there would be no reason Sky Angel can't. The stance some are taking is, Sky Angel cannot now provide Distants either because of the Court order. It is that, that I disagree with. I do think an independant provider can sell distants to the population at large by leasing equipment from Dish.

It would be interesting if there were indeed two or three companies that wanted to provide distants this way. The court would be saying they cannot conduct private business just because they are using a piece of Dish equipment, unrelated to the subscribers Dish has and provides service to.

 

[RVD420]

I think this will all boil down to intent.

*IF* Dish came up with the idea and contacted NPS then there could be a problem.

Now *IF* NPS saw an oppertunity and contacted Dish about leasing Transponder space then I don't think there will be a problem.

NPS is leasing a Transponder. They can put on it what they want.

Distant Networks, porn, sports,...hell they can even just send down a slate or null packets if they want to.

Now PQ on the NPS distance channels shoudl be desent. Only 8 channels on a Transponder.
Dish is running 10 or more channels on a TP. 12 to 13 on some LIL Spotbeam TPs

 

[Chris Walker]

OK. I'll bite.

That specifically is not against the court order. However, NPS would not legally be allowed to sell distants because they are in participation with Echostar.

How are they "in participation" with E*? NPS leased a transponder from E* and they are free to do whatever they'd like with it, just because E* can't sell distants doesn't mean anyone who does business with E* can't sell them either. Unless there was an injunction where E* can't lease it's satellite space, there's nothing illegal here.

 

[chaddux]

DirecTV does not own nor sell Fox News, Fox Movies, etc. And DirecTV's agreements have nothing to do with Dish Network.

Talk about a hollow argument.

LOL! Oh wow. You are grasping at straws now.

Scott, he knows he's wrong but he's not going to back down. He's just being belligerent.

 

[Robert NTSC Archivist]

So when I log in tomorrow and I punch in my information how is the NPS gonna know if I am a Dish Netwrok customer or not.

Do I have to tell them. Seems like they will have to know how to tell Dish Network that I have a contract with NPS and allow the signal over there carrier waves.

Bob

 

[Chris Walker]

I hate to agree with Greg, but there is a difference the way you worded it. Dish is not under a court order to stop providing religious programming they can if they want to. So there would be no reason Sky Angel can't. The stance some are taking is, Sky Angel cannot now provide Distants either because of the Court order. It is that, that I disagree with. I do think an independant provider can sell distants to the population at large by leasing equipment from Dish.

Right, Sky Angel is fully free to provide distant networks if they'd like to. They aren't "actively working" with E*.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Now *IF* NPS saw an oppertunity and contacted Dish about leasing Transponder space then I don't think there will be a problem.on some LIL Spotbeam TPs

On todays retailer chat Charlie said that NPS aproached them with the idea.

 

[Chris Walker]

LOL! Oh wow. You are grasping at straws now.

Scott, he knows he's wrong but he's not going to back down. He's just being belligerent.

You know in the back of my mind I agreed with Greg when he was saying that the judge COULDN'T accept the settlement with the networks last month even though I wanted to believe otherwise, but legally I don't see anything wrong with this NPS deal. I don't see where Greg is coming from.

 

[Chris Walker]

So when I log in tomorrow and I punch in my information how is the NPS gonna know if I am a Dish Netwrok customer or not.

Do I have to tell them. Seems like they will have to know how to tell Dish Network that I have a contract with NPS and allow the signal over there carrier waves.

Bob

This is what I want to know, hopefully there will be a database of the million subs that lost this programming.

 

[Neutron]

Greg is just afraid that his precious NAB is going to lose hold on their monopoly and that consumers are finally getting the freedom to choose.

 

[mikew]

*sigh* The transponder does not have "purpose", NPS is free to do whatever they want with it. It was decided BY NPS *AFTER* the lease was completed that they would sell distant networks. NPS will pay the lease fees to E*, NPS keeps $ the distant networks brings in. NPS is captalizing on an opportunity to make some easy cash, good for them.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=71481&page=2

Although JL usually pisses most of us off...he has been a good source on picking up court documents. Look at this PDF.


...NPS....plans to lease a transponder from Dish Network, that will allow legitimate conusmers who are presently slated to be turned off by Dish Network pursuant to a court ordered injuntion, to retain their network signals.....

I think the majority of you are using rose colored glasses in hopes this goes through. It won't. Additionally, I think this gives Tivo more fuel for the fire in the court proceedings to demonstrate Echostar's blatant disregard for the court system.

 

[Tampa8]

It is almost more the fact that the NAB could lose and be running around with their heads cut off that makes me happy, more than Charlie winning.

 

[Robert NTSC Archivist]

Agreed but didnt I read that Dish Network was not sharing its customer data base?

 

[Voyager6]

Greg's argument hinges on the "acting in concert" phrase in the injunction. This arrangement between E* and NPS seems to an arm's length contract. In other words, legit. This is not a shell company set up to circumvent the injunction, which I think the "in concert" provision was referring to. I ask again, why would the Networks, NAB and others object to a third-party providing DNS service to qualified subscribers?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I personally could care less if Charlie won or not, for me its about the consumers having freedom of choice and who have spent a lot of money on equipment to watch TV.

Thats why we have been fighting the fight, not for Charlie.

 

[Foxbat]

According to the document that JL referenced in his post over at DBStalk, it looked like NPS is subcontracting with a third party to uplink their signal to Echostar's satellite, so even the "going through Echostar's Uplink Center" argument goes out the window.

 

[Chris Walker]

It is almost more the fact that the NAB could lose and be running around with their heads cut off that makes me happy, more than Charlie winning.

You know the NAB's CEO's blood pressure has been through the roof since they heard about this. "THOSE DAMN COPYRIGHT INFRINGERS!!!"

 

[NightRyder]

It is almost more the fact that the NAB could lose and be running around with their heads cut off that makes me happy, more than Charlie winning.

Ditto! The NAB needs to be humbled and I can't think of a better way to start. E* is punished for their illegal behavior, their subscribers aren't


NightRyder

 

[mikew]

Another thought...how can NPS authorize the recievers' cards to allow the programming if they are not working "in concert" with Echostar? I doubt they will have the ability to authorize cards from their end.