EchoStar Looks to Supreme Court for Relief

[Lucky]

EchoStar Looks to Supreme Court for Relief
By Ted Hearn 7/26/2006 7:27:00 PM

EchoStar Communications is planning to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to protect more than a half-million subscribers from losing access to out-of-market feeds of ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox programming if a private settlement with hundreds of local TV stations can't be reached.

As a result of court setbacks in copyright disputes, EchoStar may have to terminate distant network service to 1.2 million customers in all, including about 600,000 who have been receiving the programming legally. An abrupt cutoff would likely inflict financial pain on EchoStar and generate a strong political backlash on Capitol Hill.

Legal scenarios are expected to play out in three courts as key House lawmakers wait to learn whether thousands of voters are going to lose access to network programming stemming from a court case that has dragged on for years and received little attention.

First, EchoStar Tuesday asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit -- which authorized the injunction back in May and just rejected EchoStar’s appeal -- to stay the ruling pending the outcome of the appeal it will file in the Supreme Court.

If the 11th Circuit rejects EchoStar’s stay motion, the case would return to a U.S. District Court in south Florida for processing of the injunction.

Second, in preparation of the stay denial, EchoStar and network-affiliated TV stations that sued EchoStar jointly asked the lower court Tuesday to postpone any injunction until Sept. 11. Both sides informed the court that they were attempting to reach a settlement.

The parties were urged to file for a 45-day postponement by key members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, including chairman Joe Barton (R-Texas).

Lastly, if the District Court ignores the postponement request, EchoStar still has the option of asking the Supreme Court to lift the injunction while considering the merits of the appeal of the 11th Circuit's May ruling.

In that decision, the 11th Circuit found that EchoStar had flagrantly broken the law by selling out-of-market network signals to thousands of ineligible customers.



http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6356776.html?display=Breaking+News

 

[hobojoe]

well this is the best of the bad news yet. sounds like they just need more time and hopfully it will all work out. i hope!

 

[riffjim4069]

The best scenario I see is all 600,000 customers illegally receiving distant networks are turned off - E* pays in excess of (pick a 9 figure number) to plaintiffs for legal fees, copyright infringement and penalties - E* agrees to 3rd party monitoring of how DNS customers are qualified - E* customers will be left paying the bill.

I don't see the Supreme Court hearing this case.

 

[Lucky]

If you have waivers from your local stations you are considered to be part of the 600,000 legally receiving the channels, correct ? Who are the legal ones and who are the illegal ones ? Waivers are considered legal, correct ?

 

[ggw2000]

This Begs the ?

At this point, thus Dish know who has qualified waivers? I understand that they did not provide any of this info to the court and this makes me nervous as I have had all network waivers for over 6 years! Any thoughts on this part of the ongoing situation? Also, the extension would be nice but it brings us right up to the start of the "new" fall season . I truly hope that this settles out before that time. Gerry

 

[waltinvt]

How many times does it have to be said?!

As far as Dish and distants (DNS) go, it doesn't matter if you've got waivers up the yingyang - unless something unforeseen happens, when the ruling is implementeed, everybody's distants get turned off - even Chucks. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU'RE LEGALLY QUALIFIED OR NOT.

That means it's a done deal, Dish has lost the case and been sentenced! The sentence just hasn't been carried out yet. They're sorta like someone that's been on death row for 8 years and their appeals have finally run out. They basically need a last minute miracle at this point.

That said, it appears there's something going on behind closed doors, which may help bring about a 45 day delay for the hangman.

Then again, it might just be Murdouch wanting a little more time to enjoy seeing Charles squirm.

 

[Lucky]

walt, you totally miss the point here. In the article it says that they asked the court to postpone the injunction until September 11, because they are trying to reach a settlement. They say they would like to reach a settlement for the 600,000 people legally receiving the distant networks. What we would like to know if they reach a settlement to keep the distant networks for the legal customers would this include the people with waivers ?

 

[ggw2000]

I'll 2nd that..

walt, you totally miss the point here. In the article it says that they asked the court to postpone the injunction until September 11, because they are trying to reach a settlement. They say they would like to reach a settlement for the 600,000 people legally receiving the distant networks. What we would like to know if they reach a settlement to keep the distant networks for the legal customers would this include the people with waivers ?

Yes, Walt you missed the point. The point is if a deal IS worked out that legally sub'd DNS folks get to remain and illegally DNS'd subs are cutoff does Dish have the "paperwork" to prove who has their waivers. This is purely conjecture on maybe some sort of deal and at this point has nothing to do with current reality. We all know what that is as of today.. Gerry

 

[nitstalker]

Ok, here's my version of how it will play out...

E* Loses the case

Subs are shut off

Citizens get P.O.'d at Capitol Hill

Being this is an election year, they quickly pass some sort of bill that allows service to continue.

BUT they add in the broadcast flag to the bill to get it to pass.

SO We lose either way

 

[Greg Bimson]

I am not trying to be a naysayer here, but...

The broadcasters have the upper hand. What if each plaintiff wants $10 million and requalification under terms of the SHVERA?

The broadcasters have all the cards. It is simply a matter if Dish Network can live with a "dictated" settlement.

 

[waltinvt]

walt, you totally miss the point here. In the article it says that they asked the court to postpone the injunction until September 11, because they are trying to reach a settlement. They say they would like to reach a settlement for the 600,000 people legally receiving the distant networks. What we would like to know if they reach a settlement to keep the distant networks for the legal customers would this include the people with waivers ?

Yes, Walt you missed the point. The point is if a deal IS worked out that legally sub'd DNS folks get to remain and illegally DNS'd subs are cutoff does Dish have the "paperwork" to prove who has their waivers. This is purely conjecture on maybe some sort of deal and at this point has nothing to do with current reality. We all know what that is as of today.. Gerry

Sorry guys. You're right, I should have read more carefully. I thought it was more wondering if the original ruling was going to apply to even those legally qualified if nothing intervened.