Deal with NPS to "save" distants on DISH!
- Thread starter chaddux
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 1K
- Views 124K
You call them. We have had a number of folks get RV waivers already.
They are supposed to have something online about this soon (I thought it was up already)
They are supposed to have something online about this soon (I thought it was up already)
I'll take a helping of humble pie now. 
I am surprised that the appeals weren't even filed. Congrats to all those who were able to keep distants.
I am surprised that the appeals weren't even filed. Congrats to all those who were able to keep distants.
Greg,
You're still humble without the pie (just look in those mirrors you have ).
I don't think any apology is required, all of your points were good arguments.
Wait a minute.... I think there is an apology due. Who was that, that threaten Decisionmark with a law suit? I think maybe they should be sued for damages. After-all, I think there are repercussions for threating a law suit and then not doing it.
Another possible outcome.... Maybe new satellite customers will see a benefit in getting Dish Network compatible equipment so they can get satellite and DNS, instead of going with DirecTV compatible equipment. Maybe those who are already customers with DirecTV compatible equipment will get some NPS compatible equipment.
SW
p.s. I guess these concert tickets are now useless!
You're still humble without the pie (just look in those mirrors you have
).I don't think any apology is required, all of your points were good arguments.
Wait a minute.... I think there is an apology due. Who was that, that threaten Decisionmark with a law suit? I think maybe they should be sued for damages. After-all, I think there are repercussions for threating a law suit and then not doing it.
Another possible outcome.... Maybe new satellite customers will see a benefit in getting Dish Network compatible equipment so they can get satellite and DNS, instead of going with DirecTV compatible equipment. Maybe those who are already customers with DirecTV compatible equipment will get some NPS compatible equipment.
SW
p.s. I guess these concert tickets are now useless!
It is on their website: http://www.mydistantnetworks.com/
Bottom left: https://www.mydistantnetworks.com/RVrequest.pdf
Mitch
Good for you, Greg. You were willing to come back daily and fight for your point of view. I couldn't take that much abuse. 
Now The Fun Begins
Everyone should remember that Judge D. was not the final stop on the original action and may not be here. He has teed the ball up for the LIL/DNS battle which could easily be incorporated into an appeal. It seems that NPS is granting DNS in part on the basis of the customers previous relationship to E*. NPS could not provide DNS except for the active participation of E* (they own and maintain the hardware). Now everybody may just sit back and wait to see what Congress does but I would think the temptation to get a definitive ruling on the multiple-DBS gambit would be too much to resist. Here E* is gaining (perhaps) a competitive advantage by providing in concert with a nominally independent company what it could not provide by itself (LIL and DNS). Is there any evidence that NPS is more scrupulous in qualifying DNS customers? This setup does eviscerate the no DNS if LIL policy of SHVERA but Judge D. danced around that issue. Will the
Everyone should remember that Judge D. was not the final stop on the original action and may not be here. He has teed the ball up for the LIL/DNS battle which could easily be incorporated into an appeal. It seems that NPS is granting DNS in part on the basis of the customers previous relationship to E*. NPS could not provide DNS except for the active participation of E* (they own and maintain the hardware). Now everybody may just sit back and wait to see what Congress does but I would think the temptation to get a definitive ruling on the multiple-DBS gambit would be too much to resist. Here E* is gaining (perhaps) a competitive advantage by providing in concert with a nominally independent company what it could not provide by itself (LIL and DNS). Is there any evidence that NPS is more scrupulous in qualifying DNS customers? This setup does eviscerate the no DNS if LIL policy of SHVERA but Judge D. danced around that issue. Will the
$$$ Talking about the settlement that several Fox stations rejected which held up the Dish/Network deal to allow Dish to continue selling distants.
(sorry fat fingers terminated the message early, here is the continuation)
11th Circuit? I know a lot of people, particularly the Ergenophiles won't understand or care why this is important but for those who are SHVERA wonks, it bears watching. Otherwise D* will have to find its own "DNS only" partner to play the same game and then the purpose of this portion of the law is clearly undermined. Even Judge D. would see that. I don't think that anybody will appeal. But if this case is appealed and/or a new action regarding the LIL issue is begun, I'd give 3-1 that this scheme gets thrown out by Atlanta.
Oh, you mean the "settlement" that was dead ab initio and could not have played any role in this saga. Why do people keep bringing this up? It's like carrying around the corpse in "Weekend at Bernie's." Once more for old time's sake - the much ballyhooed settlement was stillborn. Rupert (and anyone else) could have accepted it by signing in blood and it would not have made one iota of difference. Referring to it has as much relevance as noting what color jockey shorts Judge D. was wearing when he signed the injunction. And makes you look....ummm.....illl-informed
Search http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx for zip codes in white areas. On this site you do not need an address just the zip. Try 31501 as an exampple of what to look for. For 31501 it shows not net work stations providing a grade B signal. So 31501 is a tru white area. If you check that zip on the D* broker it shows elgible for HD DNS. Bit not SD DNS because D* provides the LiL for that ZIP.
Thanks for a GOOD debate, one of true SatelliteGuys caliber! No name calling just honest opinions and observations. You did good and I believe the debate was the best one in a long long time and you were the one running with the ball.I'll take a helping of humble pie now.
I am surprised that the appeals weren't even filed. Congrats to all those who were able to keep distants.
Thanks Greg!
Oh, you mean the "settlement" that was dead ab initio and could not have played any role in this saga. Why do people keep bringing this up? It's like carrying around the corpse in "Weekend at Bernie's." Once more for old time's sake - the much ballyhooed settlement was stillborn. Rupert (and anyone else) could have accepted it by signing in blood and it would not have made one iota of difference. Referring to it has as much relevance as noting what color jockey shorts Judge D. was wearing when he signed the injunction. And makes you look....ummm.....illl-informed
Aw jeez, give it a rest will ya. It's over. The horse is dead. The ship has sailed.
I agree that appeals may yet to come, but it will be a long time before those are heard, argued and decided.
I agree. I was one of the guys butting heads with you constantly, and I swore that you were WAY too invested in seeing the NAB win, but I always enjoyed the spirited debate.
The Distant Networks are dead. Long Live the Distant Networks!
Maybe we'll see you next year when DishOnline goes live, and people find a way to bypass their affiliates for content (assuming they don't get stupid and charge too much for it and kill it).
Who needs affiliates when many shows are now put online BY THE NETWORKS a day after they air on TV?
I honestly don't believe it is "over", yet.
Now that a loophole has been found, someone will go marching into Congress to have the loophole closed, to an extent.
There is also a chance that an appeal could be filed to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, but as long as the deliberation would take, I would honestly believe that any appeal wouldn't be adjudicated by the end of 2008.
Getting a law passed to close this loophole would be much easier, especially because Congress will address bills to allow Dish Network to show significantly-viewed channels again. If there are going to be bills to modify the significantly-viewed section, I could see a law modifying what the Dish Network/NPS deal exploited.
Now that a loophole has been found, someone will go marching into Congress to have the loophole closed, to an extent.
There is also a chance that an appeal could be filed to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, but as long as the deliberation would take, I would honestly believe that any appeal wouldn't be adjudicated by the end of 2008.
Getting a law passed to close this loophole would be much easier, especially because Congress will address bills to allow Dish Network to show significantly-viewed channels again. If there are going to be bills to modify the significantly-viewed section, I could see a law modifying what the Dish Network/NPS deal exploited.
While I could see that happening, I would see Dish and NPS being grandfathered and continue doing business as they are now, which would make the entire point mot anyways.
