How To Solve Dish Dns "issue"

[gymerap]

Require customers to have a phone connection with a legitimate number to connect to Dish Network to verify phone number/exchange/zip code etc...its accurate and one cant fudge it like a "stated" billing address.

example...if your phone number is an Atlanta exchange and you are getting NYC/LA locals...goodbye DNS.

Similar to DirecTV...you need a phone connection to access regional/subcription sports programming...in this case require a phone connection for DNS as well.

Its a compliance concession that may save Dish's behind.

 

[SatinKzo]

So what about all the VOIP providers that provide secondary numbers from any area code?

Or even the numerous apps out there that you can use to setup a little PBX style system and spoof your call-id info.

 

[jrbdmb]

The issue with DNS is not "movers", it is Dish providing DNS to addresses that the NAB says do not qualify for DNS; Dish continued to use a diferent model to determine DNS eligibility that qualified more subs than the NAB wanted. The courts have now decided in the NAB's favor.

I have not read anywhere that "movers" are the reason for the potential shutdown of Dish Network DNS.

 

[dishrich]

Similar to DirecTV...you need a phone connection to access regional/subcription sports programming...

You're incorrect about this as well - while D* may SAY this in their brochures, this is not enforced, not even for NFLST. I KNOW this 'cause I have several customers w/out phone connections & they get them just fine.

It's enforced about as much as requiring a phone for secondary boxes, which is zilch! I'm sure D* realizes that with more & more households dumping house phones altogether & going cell only, it would be a detriment to keeping/getting subs.

The issue with DNS is not "movers", it is Dish providing DNS to addresses that the NAB says do not qualify for DNS; Dish continued to use a diferent model to determine DNS eligibility that qualified more subs than the NAB wanted. The courts have now decided in the NAB's favor.

I have not read anywhere that "movers" are the reason for the potential shutdown of Dish Network DNS.

EXACTLY!!!

 

[waltinvt]

The issue with DNS is not "movers", it is Dish providing DNS to addresses that the NAB says do not qualify for DNS; Dish continued to use a diferent model to determine DNS eligibility that qualified more subs than the NAB wanted. The courts have now decided in the NAB's favor.

I have not read anywhere that "movers" are the reason for the potential shutdown of Dish Network DNS.

Speaking of the accepted qualifying "model", it's interesting that although the FCC (in their report to congress last Dec) told congress that although the existing Longley-Rice method (long used for analog) is also ok for digital qualification, there are some problems with digital signal reception that congress should address and clarify.

My point here (and it's probably a weak one) is that maybe Dish has a little wiggle room for salvaging the possibility of still being able to offer digital dns and maybe that's where they should be concentrating their efforts now.

I'm bringing this up because as far as I know, it's still not clear if the impending loss of distants for Dish includes the right to offer CBS-HD or not - especially since digital didn't even exist when this court case started.

If CBS-HD is NOT included in the ruling then Dish should immediately work out a similar deal with the other 3 nets.

If it is included, Dish may still be able to appeal that part of it based on the fact that the law is not yet clear about the particulars of digital signals reception and therefore qualification for them may be somewhat subject to interpertation.

It's worth a shot because if Dish can retain being able to offer CBS-HD and also bring in the other 3 HD DNS, it lessens the hurt in 2 ways:

1. Dish dns customers that have HD equipment keep CBS-HD and possibly gain the other 3.

2. Analog dns subs that have gone HD will probably then upgrade equipment and programming.

Maybe I'm all wet and grasping at straws but it seems like it's worth a shot for Dish - especially since it's supposed to be in the nation's best interest to be encourging the move to digital, not hindering it.

 

[riffjim4069]

The roughly 600,000 Dish Network customers illegally receiving DNS are going to have the plug pulled. Slam-Dunk, end of story.

The only hope for the plug not being pulled on the other 600,000 or so folks legally receiving DNS is for E* to admit guilt, and pay out the arse for copyright infringements and other penalties that will satisfy both the plaintiffs and the court. What are the odds of E* admitting wrong doing? You do the math!

 

[RBODYMAN]

Please clarify an issue for me. In 2000 I got waivers fron NBC and ABC to receive their NYC signal. I pay $1.50 for each to E*. Does this ruling apply to me?

 

[pdxsam]

Please clarify an issue for me. In 2000 I got waivers fron NBC and ABC to receive their NYC signal. I pay $1.50 for each to E*. Does this ruling apply to me?

Yes it does.

 

[hobojoe]

the phone idea doesn't work for rv'ers and truckers. i think if they don't reach a agreement they are totally gone! if they do there will be a much higher Laval to qualify. and verify.

 

[ThomasRz]

No need for DIsh to admit guilt, they have been found "guilty" (although this isnt a criminal issue)...The way i understand this is no longer an issue to be negotiated by Dish and the affiliates. This result is required by law. Possibly Dish could negotiate carrying distants outside of this case but I dont think theyll try they would rather get the customers riled up to blame everyone but Dish in the hopes of getting thelaw changed...

The roughly 600,000 Dish Network customers illegally receiving DNS are going to have the plug pulled. Slam-Dunk, end of story.

The only hope for the plug not being pulled on the other 600,000 or so folks legally receiving DNS is for E* to admit guilt, and pay out the arse for copyright infringements and other penalties that will satisfy both the plaintiffs and the court. What are the odds of E* admitting wrong doing? You do the math!

 

[dbconsultant]

the phone idea doesn't work for rv'ers and truckers. i think if they don't reach a agreement they are totally gone! if they do there will be a much higher Laval to qualify. and verify.

How much higher level can there be than giving them a copy of my rv's registration?

 

[ThomasRz]

Interesting idea but i cant believe that it would work In essence you would be rewarding dish for breaking the law. And if dish could substitute DT for analog (I wish people would stop calling it HD - for networks there is no guarantee of any HD content and even then it can be "hdlite") then they would be right back to where this whole case started

Speaking of the accepted qualifying "model", it's interesting that although the FCC (in their report to congress last Dec) told congress that although the existing Longley-Rice method (long used for analog) is also ok for digital qualification, there are some problems with digital signal reception that congress should address and clarify.

My point here (and it's probably a weak one) is that maybe Dish has a little wiggle room for salvaging the possibility of still being able to offer digital dns and maybe that's where they should be concentrating their efforts now.

I'm bringing this up because as far as I know, it's still not clear if the impending loss of distants for Dish includes the right to offer CBS-HD or not - especially since digital didn't even exist when this court case started.

If CBS-HD is NOT included in the ruling then Dish should immediately work out a similar deal with the other 3 nets.

If it is included, Dish may still be able to appeal that part of it based on the fact that the law is not yet clear about the particulars of digital signals reception and therefore qualification for them may be somewhat subject to interpertation.

It's worth a shot because if Dish can retain being able to offer CBS-HD and also bring in the other 3 HD DNS, it lessens the hurt in 2 ways:

1. Dish dns customers that have HD equipment keep CBS-HD and possibly gain the other 3.

2. Analog dns subs that have gone HD will probably then upgrade equipment and programming.

Maybe I'm all wet and grasping at straws but it seems like it's worth a shot for Dish - especially since it's supposed to be in the nation's best interest to be encourging the move to digital, not hindering it.

 

[BobaBird]

If CBS-HD is NOT included in the ruling then Dish should immediately work out a similar deal with the other 3 nets.

If by "immediately" you mean "a few years ago," I wholeheartedly agree!

My thought is the ruling shouldn't affect this private arrangement since it bypasses the disputed qualification method and none of the plaintiffs have been harmed by it.

 

[Greg Bimson]

My thought is the ruling shouldn't affect this private arrangement since it bypasses the disputed qualification method...

Are you sure about that? Tony and I went around on this issue. Here are the problems...

1) The CBS-HD agreement with Dish Network only covers people that a) have no access to any CBS affiliate (subscriber is in a white area), or b) only have access to a CBS owned-and-operated affiliate.

2) Did CBS obtain approval from the syndicators which run programming on WCBS and KCBS nationally? I doubt it.

The observation is that Problem 1 is simply CBS granting a "blanket waiver" for distant networks. Since this distant-HD qualification only appears to be for CBS O&O's, and is limited in its delivery area, it appears the "contract" between Dish Network and CBS is simply using the SHVIA/SHVERA as part of the contract.

That becomes more evident in Problem 2. Dr. Phil, Insider and Entertainment Tonight are all syndicated by WCBS and KCBS. Unless the syndicator has given permission, these are only for in-market retransmission. The syndicator would have to give permission to CBS to redistribute the programs into other areas. Otherwise, stations such as KRON would be screaming to high-heaven that their station is no longer the exclusive local distributor of those shows for the San Francisco area.

Therefore, there is some kind of license being used by CBS to show the syndicated programs. It is either Solution A) the distant network provision of the SHVIA/SHVERA, or Solution B) the synidcators giving CBS the ability to retransmit shows nationwide on the HD affiliates.

And Solution A is so much more easier than Solution B. So it is much easier to use the existing law than to draw up a completely private agreement.

Therefore, if the "private agreement" is using the SHVIA/SHVERA as I suspect, then the HD feeds will be cut-off as well.

 

[riffjim4069]

No need for DIsh to admit guilt, they have been found "guilty" (although this isnt a criminal issue)...The way i understand this is no longer an issue to be negotiated by Dish and the affiliates. This result is required by law. Possibly Dish could negotiate carrying distants outside of this case but I dont think theyll try they would rather get the customers riled up to blame everyone but Dish in the hopes of getting thelaw changed...

Absolutely...and there is no doubt the court will pull the plug on those illegally receiving services. Unfortunately, the court had no other remedy when it ordered DNS be terminate for all Dish Network customers due to E*'s repeated violations and "willful" pattern of abuse; they simply broke the law and ignoring court findings over a period of years. The licensing and punitive damages aside, the court still retains its ability to modify or rescind this order in part prior to execution. My point is there is still hope for those who are legally receiving DNS, just not very much.

 

[jpesc]

It's all about control

It does not matter, how you slice it or dice it, it's all about government control, it's just another way for the government to tell you what you can watch, look at it it this way, if I'm willing to pay to watch something, why should the government even interfere, except to tell you what you can and cannot do

 

[Greg Bimson]

The licensing and punitive damages aside, the court still retains its ability to modify or rescind this order in part prior to execution. My point is there is still hope for those who are legally receiving DNS, just not very much.

You have this backwards.

The courts CANNOT modify or rescind this order IN PART. The remedy for willful violation is a permanent injunction of the license. The court followed the law to the letter; the court can only issue a permanent injunction against Dish Network to terminate all distant network service.

Welcome aboard, jpesc.

It does not matter, how you slice it or dice it, it's all about government control, it's just another way for the government to tell you what you can watch, look at it it this way, if I'm willing to pay to watch something, why should the government even interfere, except to tell you what you can and cannot do

No, it isn't.

Dish Network has a contract with ESPN to distribute ESPN nationally. Dish Network does not have a contract to distribute WCBS nationally. So, until Dish Network has a contract to distribute WCBS nationally, the government has nothing to do with what you can and cannot watch.

 

[riffjim4069]

It does not matter, how you slice it or dice it, it's all about government control, it's just another way for the government to tell you what you can watch, look at it it this way, if I'm willing to pay to watch something, why should the government even interfere, except to tell you what you can and cannot do

Er...it actually has more to do with Copyright Law.

 

[MikeD-C05]

Why doesn't Dish get off the pot and finish the rest of the country's locals ? Then they would have all the country finished and you could get locals anywhere with Dish. Wouldn't that make the distants a non issue for anyone except the rvers and truckers. THen I am sure you could just call from the area you are at at night when You pull over and tell them what address/ zipcode you are at and they would turn on the locals for that area giving you your networks. Or rvers and truckers could just use an ota antenna in conjunction with the sat antenna for their networks. Either way it has to be cheaper than fighting this case out in the courts for the last 8 or 9 years like they have been doing.

 

[BobaBird]

Greg, no I'm not sure about CBS-HD. It was just my thought, and probably mostly wishful thinking on my part. We'll have to wait and see if there's still a reason for me to add a 148 dish.