Dish, DirecTV Team to Tackle Set-Top Proposal

[bluegras]

Competitors Dish Network and DirecTV teamed up this week to tell the FCC that problems with the agency's proposal to "unlock" set-top devices were unsurmountable, particularly for satellite operators.
That came in meetings between execs and a host of FCC officials, according to an ex parte filing.
The FCC is proposing to make MVPDs, including satellite operators, make set-top content and data available to third party navigation devices in an effort to create a retail market for set-tops, and a way to promote over-the-top video via integrated search.

http://www.multichannel.com/news/po...569?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[mdram]

i dont really see an issue
a third party box would need an internet connection to provide the OTT info
just as they do now

 

[Jim S.]

Competitors Dish Network and DirecTV teamed up this week to tell the FCC that problems with the agency's proposal to "unlock" set-top devices were unsurmountable, particularly for satellite operators.

Only because they're in bed with the content providers. This really needs to stop. Somehow, the rest of the world survives with interchangeable decryption cards, so there's no reason North America can't.

 

[Tampa8]

Huge issues. Even not so friendly to the Cable industry leaders are agreeing with Cable and Satellite. There is no such animal at this time remember, a cablecard is a very different thing. This is a classic case of an idea that sounds so normal, that it should have been done before now so people don't look at the details and what it could mean.
Particularly for DISH and Directv who lead the way in DVR technology this could be bad for them and subscribers.

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...eaks-volumes-about-problems-with-fccs-set-top

http://www.forbes.com/sites/haroldf...roposed-rules-for-set-top-boxes/#333af2d46c57

http://techfreedom.org/post/143378582989/fccs-set-top-box-proposal-is-illegal-and

http://www.multichannel.com/news/di...sue-if-fcc-set-top-box-proposal-stands/404356

 

[KAB]

The FCC have much bigger fish to fry.

 

[mdram]

remember years ago when every tv was cable ready? no need for boxes at all

 

[Tampa8]

Remember years ago when every TV was capable of stealing Cable signals? No need for boxes at all......

 

[MikeD-C05]

What should be done, instead of 3rd party vendors building set top boxes, is that ALL satellite and cable companies should allow their subscribers to BUY their set top boxes from their respective companies and then there would be NO FEES on ANY set top boxes that are then owned by their subscribers. That would fulfill what the FCC wanted( bring the prices down the consumer pays in fees for their set top boxes), without hurting the satellite and cable companies ,because the subscriber would no longer be hit with additional receiver fees -that are still growing in price , and the satellite and cable companies would get to make the set top boxes and be compensated for their receivers. You could either BUY your receivers out right to avoid any additional receiver fees or you could still lease them and pay the monthly fee if you prefered. Like you do with cars where you can either lease or buy and own your cars. I know that it would sure make me happy, if they let the subscriber buy their own boxes and I would no longer have to pay the $29.00 in monthly fees.

 

[nelson61]

What should be done, instead of 3rd party vendors building set top boxes, is that ALL satellite and cable companies should allow their subscribers to BUY their set top boxes from their respective companies and then there would be NO FEES on ANY set top boxes that are then owned by their subscribers. That would fulfill what the FCC wanted( bring the prices down the consumer pays in fees for their set top boxes), without hurting the satellite and cable companies ,because the subscriber would no longer be hit with additional receiver fees -that are still growing in price , and the satellite and cable companies would get to make the set top boxes and be compensated for their receivers. You could either BUY your receivers out right to avoid any additional receiver fees or you could still lease them and pay the monthly fee if you prefered. Like you do with cars where you can either lease or buy and own your cars. I know that it would sure make me happy, if they let the subscriber buy their own boxes and I would no longer have to pay the $29.00 in monthly fees.

Just so they don't do like Dish does today. You can buy the Dish box but you still pay the box fees as if you were rent/leasing it

 

[navychop]

Other fees would go up. These companies aren't going to allow their revenues to decrease. PERIOD

 

[ChadT41]

It never said providers couldn't charge outlet fees... They could still determine the number of outlets.

 

[Brandon_m]

Cable boxes have had a reputation throughout the past of being horrible to use, outdated and laggy crap. That is changing recently with the hopper 3 and 4K Joey. Even the xfinity X1 boxes are a lot better than the old cable boxes. I'm just hoping this proposal will make these providers realize customers want and need a good experience when using their boxes. Streaming devices like roku, Apple TV, etc already have a great ecosystem and user experience. They just don't have the content that the providers do.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys mobile app

 

[DishSubLA]

All this comes to late--and too little. The fact is the free market is already solving this problem: the streaming boxes and the latest enhanced boxes accessing new MVPD services are the "open box." The FCC proposals will have no impact because this will have fixed itself. Also, just abuot all the companies including the CE companies who make TV's and other products who must also be on board are against it because it would require expsosing their propriatary software and also expose their services/software to being broken-meaning screwed up with all sorts of failuers like almost any firmware update doen wrong--by 3rd parties who will all have the previladge of firmware updateing a different companies firmware. Samsung or Vizio get all the complaints and take a hit on TV sales when their TV's no longer work right because some 3rd party service has messed up their code. This proposal is going nowhere--except court if the FCC presses on. I don't think they will. The FCC will eventually have no choice but to just drop it and claim the emerging tech in new boxes using IPTV is the "open box."

 

[Claude Greiner]

What about all that free to air crap Dish had to deal with several years ago?

Hell, they didn't even need dish networks blessing to break the encryption.

I'm sure it can be done

I'd love to see a box with duel smart card slots to do dish and Directv.

 

[jerryez]

I thought Dish supported this FCC proposal, because they wanted to be able to sell their Hopper boxes to cable users for use on cable, similar to what TiVo is doing now.

 

[MikeD-C05]

I thought Dish supported this FCC proposal, because they wanted to be able to sell their Hopper boxes to cable users for use on cable, similar to what TiVo is doing now.

A few years back I know that was the one of the supposed reasons why DISH and Echostar were split into two separate companies . So Echostar could make receivers for cable companies as well as DISH. But there were no real takers or it wasn't enough to make a difference. I guess now the idea of losing those wonderful Additional receiver fees has potential to effect their profits, since they create and charge what they want, and hike it when they want ,because they can. I know I pay $29.00 a month in all my fees and if I didn't have to pay the additional receiver fees, I could at least save about $14.00 as month in additional receiver fees. But knowing DISH they would come up with some outlet fee to make up some of the difference if you could buy your own receivers. That or rent you a smart card monthly, to make up for the loss of the profits from the monthly additional receiver fees.

 

[dishcomm]

Remember years ago when every TV was capable of stealing Cable signals? No need for boxes at all......

It was easy to steal cable up to about 3 years ago here. Then Time Warner went to a 100% addressable system....Digital converter boxes were mandatory.

 

[dishcomm]

What should be done, instead of 3rd party vendors building set top boxes, is that ALL satellite and cable companies should allow their subscribers to BUY their set top boxes from their respective companies and then there would be NO FEES on ANY set top boxes that are then owned by their subscribers. That would fulfill what the FCC wanted( bring the prices down the consumer pays in fees for their set top boxes), without hurting the satellite and cable companies ,because the subscriber would no longer be hit with additional receiver fees -that are still growing in price , and the satellite and cable companies would get to make the set top boxes and be compensated for their receivers. You could either BUY your receivers out right to avoid any additional receiver fees or you could still lease them and pay the monthly fee if you prefered. Like you do with cars where you can either lease or buy and own your cars. I know that it would sure make me happy, if they let the subscriber buy their own boxes and I would no longer have to pay the $29.00 in monthly fees.

Well, it actually used to be that way....In the infancy of DSS or Direct to Home satellite, the consumer bought the equipment and if handy could install it themselves. Or, they could pay a pro to install it.
I wish it would go back to that. Because I would get back into installing the systems. The Pay TV providers have a cash cow in fees. They will not let those go.
Plus, pay tv subs have the word "free" ingrained on their brains. Ironic.

 

[HobbyTalk]

Some cable company may have just put all the arguments to rest. There is no reason that Dish couldn't do the same thing.

Regional cable network Southern FiberNet to stream live TV channels over the web for as little as $5 per month

http://www.techhive.com/article/308...hannels-over-the-web-for-as-little-as-5.html?

 

[Magic Static]

aside from the business implications, right now there is no STB or chipset for that matter than can process both DTV and DISH. One of the two would have to change their modulation to become compatible with the other in order to make a box that can handle all services with just a CAM. Or someone will have to build a box than can do it all and that would be very expensive. I don't see a common STB ever happening.