Federal lawsuit on Bundled Channels

[STDog]

I think such a law banning the bundling of cable networks could face constitutional challenges on First Amendment grounds.

How does the 1st amendment fit into this?

Obviously it not the religion clauses, nor related to petitioning the government for redress.

I don't see a press issue, since it's not controlling the creation/publication of material. A law requiring bundling I could see bumping against this, but not one limiting/prohibiting the practice.

And it's surely not a speech issue, since it's not controlling the content of any "channel" nor it programs. If anything it could be a plus in this case since you are not required to support programming you disagree with any more.

Note too, that the speech at issue in the 1st amendment is political, as in complaining about the government. There are plenty of restrictions about what/how other speech can take place. From slander and inciting violence to causing panic and reporting false crimes.

 

[dishcomm]

How does the 1st amendment fit into this?

Obviously it not the religion clauses, nor related to petitioning the government for redress.

I don't see a press issue, since it's not controlling the creation/publication of material. A law requiring bundling I could see bumping against this, but not one limiting/prohibiting the practice.

And it's surely not a speech issue, since it's not controlling the content of any "channel" nor it programs. If anything it could be a plus in this case since you are not required to support programming you disagree with any more.

Note too, that the speech at issue in the 1st amendment is political, as in complaining about the government. There are plenty of restrictions about what/how other speech can take place. From slander and inciting violence to causing panic and reporting false crimes.

Many people have the misconception that freedom of speech is absolute.
If said entity decides to sue based on first amendment issues they will fail.
In reading the responses form jr law scholars and others on this thread it seems there is a general consensus to keep the status quo..Change is always difficult for some and unerving for others. So be it.
I don't think a la catre is a panacea. I want it because it represents more choice for the consumer.

 

[Rob7]

Big corporations like Viacom....Disney.... GE,,,etc will go ballistic, but it is about time that this issue gets resolved in favor of viewers being able to select what programs they want to pay for.

 

[JohnL]

Change is always difficult for some and unerving for others. So be it.
I don't think a la catre is a panacea. I want it because it represents more choice for the consumer.

Dishcomm,

Wanting more choice as to which channels you WILL pay for, will likely give you fewer actual Channel choices.

As you subtract viewers from channels, their ad income declines, which will result in increased subscriber per channel fees. Which will cause many low rated niche channels, channels you might what, to disappear completely. Channels that don't disappear will likely cost 5-10 times more than what you pay per channel under bundling

Remember the MSO's that deliver the programing have fixed costs that HAVE to covered. MSO's largest costs are, to build their system, and maintain it, as well as all those Employees with all their associated costs. Currently, MSO's need to maintain average subscriber revenue of 50-55 dollars to remain profitable. I really don't see this changing even with ala carte.

So under ala carte you will likely pay within couple of bucks of what you pay now, and receive vastly fewer channels, as well as Channel variety.

John

 

[Jeff_R]

Wanting more choice as to which channels you WILL pay for, will likely give you fewer actual Channel choices.

As you subtract viewers from channels, their ad income declines, which will result in increased subscriber per channel fees. Which will cause many low rated niche channels, channels you might what, to disappear completely.

But, how many of these niche channels (and even more general interest channels for that matter) have more than an hour or two of new content each day? I'd rather they program the channels they have now better, rather than launch a new channel to feature one or two new original programs. There is no reason that one programmer really needs 4-8 or more standard cable channels, other than to soak their customers, MSOs and end viewers alike, for more carriage fees.

We don't need the lawnmowing channel, when all they show is 1-2 new programs a day. Put those on DIY or HGTV in place of daily repeats of another show, and call it good.

 

[dishcomm]

Dishcomm,

Wanting more choice as to which channels you WILL pay for, will likely give you fewer actual Channel choices.

As you subtract viewers from channels, their ad income declines, which will result in increased subscriber per channel fees. Which will cause many low rated niche channels, channels you might what, to disappear completely. Channels that don't disappear will likely cost 5-10 times more than what you pay per channel under bundling

Remember the MSO's that deliver the programing have fixed costs that HAVE to covered. MSO's largest costs are, to build their system, and maintain it, as well as all those Employees with all their associated costs. Currently, MSO's need to maintain average subscriber revenue of 50-55 dollars to remain profitable. I really don't see this changing even with ala carte.

So under ala carte you will likely pay within couple of bucks of what you pay now, and receive vastly fewer channels, as well as Channel variety.

John

I am not concerned with the amount of channels. As far as I am concerned these niche channels are a waste of bandwidth. If I pay a few bucks more and get exactly what I want ,I will be satisfied. Money isn't the core issue. I wish to be able to pick and choose whichever services I want and pay for them. That's what I mean by choice.
I don't know who thought of the current system but I will say it's gotten outof control. It seems that every 6 months soem dopey channel appears on the DIsh EPG ...For example, the water channel..WTF is that?!!!!!. The Baby channel?..Puhhhleeeze.. How many viewers does that get in a week. 10,000?..Look, Dish had a group of channels in mapped between C-SPAN and ch 225. They are gone now. Nobody watched them. The company that sold them to Dish wanted an unrealistic increase in price. So they went away. Who cares.

 

[JohnL]

I am not concerned with the amount of channels. As far as I am concerned these niche channels are a waste of bandwidth. If I pay a few bucks more and get exactly what I want ,I will be satisfied. Money isn't the core issue. I wish to be able to pick and choose whichever services I want and pay for them. That's what I mean by choice.
I don't know who thought of the current system but I will say it's gotten outof control. It seems that every 6 months soem dopey channel appears on the DIsh EPG ...For example, the water channel..WTF is that?!!!!!. The Baby channel?..Puhhhleeeze.. How many viewers does that get in a week. 10,000?..Look, Dish had a group of channels in mapped between C-SPAN and ch 225. They are gone now. Nobody watched them. The company that sold them to Dish wanted an unrealistic increase in price. So they went away. Who cares.

Dishcomm,

After the News Channels in the 200 block, the rest of the channels are shopping channels. BTW, the water channel PAID Dish for carriage, along with the other channels that disappeared all were owned by the same company. The reason these channels disappeared was that ownership group defaulted in Paying Dish for their carriage.

The Baby channel is a special channel that requires an ala carte payment. Neither you nor I know how many subs pay for it, so what.

Dish has tools to delete from the guide which channels you want to tune too, use those tools. I'd NEVER, EVER, EVER, pay more for fewer channels just so I don't have to see them listed in the guide.

Anyway, both the the Baby Channel and the Block of channels that disappeared in the Shopping Block NEVER cost other SUBS one penny more than we paid before they were added. The reverse could be true, Dish lost revenue from those channels in the Shopping Block, so a case could be made that subs might pay more without them to offset other programing pricing increases.


When the Water Channel first became available I enjoyed a lot of programing on the channel, I'm a very AVID Boater. This channel had about 10-15 hours per week devoted to Boating GREAT for me. As time went by fewer of the shows were shown. Near the end of their carriage, there was no programing of value. All that was shown was some Infomercials selling knives and hunting supplies, nothing related to Water at all.

John

 

[BobaBird]

As you subtract viewers from channels, their ad income declines, ...

Then they need to stop counting all potential eyeballs and start counting actual viewers. The viewer count could possibly even go up for channels stuck in a top tier subscribers aren't willing to pay for to get that one channel.

 

[dishcomm]

Dishcomm,

After the News Channels in the 200 block, the rest of the channels are shopping channels. BTW, the water channel PAID Dish for carriage, along with the other channels that disappeared all were owned by the same company. The reason these channels disappeared was that ownership group defaulted in Paying Dish for their carriage.

The Baby channel is a special channel that requires an ala carte payment. Neither you nor I know how many subs pay for it, so what.

Dish has tools to delete from the guide which channels you want to tune too, use those tools. I'd NEVER, EVER, EVER, pay more for fewer channels just so I don't have to see them listed in the guide.

Anyway, both the the Baby Channel and the Block of channels that disappeared in the Shopping Block NEVER cost other SUBS one penny more than we paid before they were added. The reverse could be true, Dish lost revenue from those channels in the Shopping Block, so a case could be made that subs might pay more without them to offset other programing pricing increases.


When the Water Channel first became available I enjoyed a lot of programing on the channel, I'm a very AVID Boater. This channel had about 10-15 hours per week devoted to Boating GREAT for me. As time went by fewer of the shows were shown. Near the end of their carriage, there was no programing of value. All that was shown was some Infomercials selling knives and hunting supplies, nothing related to Water at all.

John

I'd NEVER, EVER, EVER, pay more for fewer channels just so I don't have to see them listed in the guide.

You seem to be missing my point..
It's no that I don't want to see these niche channels in the guide, etc. i will make this as clear as humanly possible. I want a list of channels put in front of me...Well ,lets pretend for a moment I am in a grocery store. I grab a cart and head in. I do my shopping. I purchase the items I want. I don't have to buy stuff to go with it just to get the desired items.
Now let's just transfer that to pay tv. Where's the problem?..
You seem to be hung up on quantity of channels rather than quality. So there's less channels. Less unpopulart or niche channels. So what?.Yes you are an avid boater. Uh huh..So what did you do as a boat owner BEFORE the water channel?.Did the absence of that channel cause you to nor use your boat? Did it have an adverse effect on your craft?....The channel is there. And "Water" pays Dish thta means it's not costing me anything. That's nice . But many niche channels do cost Subs. We subsidze the vioewing choices of a vry few people. My take on this is if those people want highly specialized TV service let them pay for it.
The demise of the Water Channel comes as no surprise.

 

[Stargazer]

Maybe if we pick the channels that we want then they will get better content on those channels so that we will pick them instead of forcing us to take junk channels with junk content. Fewer channels with better content would save the companies money by having fewer channels that they have to keep up and more bandwidth on the satellites for HD and other quality content. We can only watch one channel at a time. If they want to force these other channels on us then they should rely on advertisement revenue for their junk.