Question about the legality/morality/ethics of "moving"

[moltomateo]

Why is "moving" suggested to so many people and widely accepted by this board? I mean in its simplest form it is straight up deceptive and lying. If you need service calls what are you going to do, "move" back for a day? I know the goal is to get HD locals from other markets, and some weak spot beam signals from other markets. But what if Dish Network catches on and starts prohibiting things like this? (or even making "moving" more difficult) I just hope you aren't creating a future problem down the road. What if you pick an existing customers address? Also, you should leave your old address as your billing address.

I can't imagine calling comcast and saying oh I live in philadelphia now. But keep my pittsburgh billing address the same. I just "moved."

But seriously, what's the philosophy? What makes it "ok"?

I'm curious.

**EDIT** I could always search the forum for bits and pieces of reasoning, but it would be nice to have it all in one place. If there is already a thread regarding this issue, I would be more than happy to look it over if pointed to it. Thanks!

 

[dacman]

The bottom line is that e* wants your business and will turn a blind eye to you doing this to keep your business. I thought about moving but decided not to because I would only have hd locals and no sd locals as in West Texas there is not another spot beam I can get. In my opinion, Congress made a very poor decision in this regard. Dish provided my with distants from LA for Fox, CBS, ABC and NBC for 2 years. Then congress passes this stupid ruling and I am left in the dark..... even though I had a waiver from each local network saying it was OK. The local coverage is so poor in my area that I can only pick up fox and nbc OTA even though I live in the city. I do not believe in questioning a person's decision in this matter when our government has left people with no viable options. Hopefully things will change in the future. Each dish owner needs to make his or her own decision on what to do. If you feel uncomfortable then don't do it

 

[TNGTony]

When one "moves" they have to realize that they are on their own for service calls. They need to be able to either do the work themselves or contract their own tech. It isn't that hard.

Is it lying? Yup.
Does the party being lied to care? For the most part, Nope (as long as you pay your bill)

Is it legal? (Word-play) nope.
Is it unlawful? Yup (committing fraud against a business in a private contract)
Does the second party (Dish) care? For the most part, NOPE!

It's one of those, "no harm, no fowl" sort of things. Is this rationalizing? Absolutely YUP!

See ya
Tony

 

[Marty43]

Why is "moving" suggested to so many people and widely accepted by this board? I mean in its simplest form it is straight up deceptive and lying. If you need service calls what are you going to do, "move" back for a day? I know the goal is to get HD locals from other markets, and some weak spot beam signals from other markets. But what if Dish Network catches on and starts prohibiting things like this? (or even making "moving" more difficult) I just hope you aren't creating a future problem down the road. What if you pick an existing customers address? Also, you should leave your old address as your billing address.

I can't imagine calling comcast and saying oh I live in philadelphia now. But keep my pittsburgh billing address the same. I just "moved."

But seriously, what's the philosophy? What makes it "ok"?

I'm curious.

**EDIT** I could always search the forum for bits and pieces of reasoning, but it would be nice to have it all in one place. If there is already a thread regarding this issue, I would be more than happy to look it over if pointed to it. Thanks!

"Moving " isn't that new a concept. I learned to move back in 1984, when I had my first BUD system. Back then I lived in Syracuse, NY and ESPN would blackout all Syracuse home games, they carried. So I moved to my brothers address in Rochester beyond the black out area. Worked like a charm then.

 

[MikeD-C05]

MOVING is a way around the antiquated rules and laws that the NAB and the FCC force us to live under.

Untill everyone has locals in HD or even sd , it is a way to get the most out of your satellite system. It gives satellite an edge as far as the competition is concerned. If they can't offer hd locals ,then sat can with a little help from the subscriber -who lies to get them.


Is it unethical? Yes it is, but some lies are worse than others. Does it cause anyone to die? Does Dish or Directv lose any money over it? NO on both accounts. The only group that it hurts is the National Association of Broadcasters who force us to do without the best in hd or local channels unlike Canada where they can get up to 5 different U.S. cities in hd as normal programming on their sat systems.

It is just like the "don't ask don't tell " rules of the army in relation to the gays in the military. Except in this case it is "don't tell and they won't ask " with satellite. Don't tell them what you are really doing and they won't ask as long as you pay your bill.

But in the end it is up to you . If you are ethically bothered then don't do it.

 

[EJMCOL]

Yes, it is lying and unethical.

Just subscribe to SkyAngel and repent at Church on Sunday and the Lord will never notice.

 

[tjwgrr]

What's better for E*?

I continue to be a long-time E* customer who pays on time every month but I "move" in order to receive "local" HD network channels via E*?

or

I dump E* and switch to either D* or Comcast which both offer local HD network channels in my area?

 

[moltomateo]

Thanks a million for the feed back! I like to hear both sides of the story. Makes sense both ways. In the end, it's not a big deal. If I was one of those affected, and I had the necessary balls, I might do the same!

 

[randyj]

Yes, it is lying and unethical.

Just subscribe to SkyAngel and repent at Church on Sunday and the Lord will never notice.

Is it lying? Yes. Is it unethical? HELL NO, creating rules and laws that put the DBS providers at a competive disadvantage to cable and hose rural customers are a better match for that term if you ask me.

 

[navychop]

Good point.

 

[Buzzdar]

im all for it

 

[psnarula]

MOVING is a way around the antiquated rules and laws that the NAB and the FCC force us to live under.

this is the overwhelming answer to the original question. the technology exists to make out of market locals a possibility for all satellite subscribers but the national association of broadcasters lobbies the fcc heavily to strengthen "broadcasting's rich tradition of localism" (this is a direct quote from a NAB spokesperson commenting on last year's ruling that forced E* to shut off distant locals).

the NAB says that tv stations function as a "public service" in times of need (weather, natural disaster, etc). and maybe that's true to some extent. but it's not nearly as true as it was 50 years ago when there were no other way to get the news.

combine this fact with the way they've chosen to divide up some of the DMAs (the terre haute DMA should just be assimilated into indianapolis; there are so many other examples of poorly defined DMAs or areas where two markets can legitimately claim viewers -- baltimore / washington dc, providence / boston, etc).

when it's all said and done, who can fault you for wanting out of market locals (especially if they're in HD)? i "move" from my home in the baltimore DMA to the greensboro, north carolina market so i can get better coverage of acc basketball (fox sports net south and more games from the LF Sports affiliate).

do i feel bad? not in the least. i pay for the channels i get. i just refuse to let the bureaucracy keep me living by their 1950s business model.

 

[MikeD-C05]

Amen Brother! :up

 

[cj9788]

Legal yes.
Ethical/Moral no.

The worst thing to happen if you get caught moving is you lose the locals you "moved" for.

 

[Tower Guy]

Is it lying? Yes. Is it unethical? HELL NO, creating rules and laws that put the DBS providers at a competive disadvantage to cable and hose rural customers are a better match for that term if you ask me.

Is it unethical? HECK YES

 

[kstuart]

If you look at the definition of ethical, it is the same as moral:

mor·al [máwr?l]
adj
1. involving right and wrong: relating to issues of right and wrong and to how individuals should behave 2. derived from personal conscience: based on what somebody’s conscience suggests is right or wrong, rather than on what the law says should be done 3. in terms of natural justice: regarded in terms of what is known to be right or just, as opposed to what is officially or outwardly declared to be right or just a moral victory.
4. encouraging goodness and respectability: giving guidance on how to behave decently and honorably 5. good by accepted standards: good or right, when judged by the standards of the average person or society at large 6. telling right from wrong: able to distinguish right from wrong and to make decisions based on that knowledge 7. based on conviction: based on an inner conviction, in the absence of physical proof

n (plural mor·als)
1. valuable lesson in behavior: a conclusion about how to behave or proceed drawn from a story or event 2. final sentence of story giving advice: a short, precise rule, usually written in a rather literary style as the conclusion to a story, used to help people remember the best or most sensible way to behave

npl or mor·als
standards of behavior: principles of right and wrong as they govern standards of general or sexual behavior

[14th century. From Latin moralis , from mor- , stem of mos “custom,” in plural “morals” (source of English morale and morose).]


-morally, adv
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. © 1993-2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

So, some are arguing that the practice is morally correct as per the third definition, due to the unjust actions of the NAB.

 

[MikeD-C05]

NO we are rationalizing that it is okay to get distants by moving I never said it was morally right. But we could go into the subject of do you ever speed or not wear your seatbelt in the car? Or have you ever driven drunk ANYTIME in your life? Have you ever gotten more money back then you should and kept it? Ever jay walk on the street, have your meter expire on your parking spot , yet you didn't put the other quarter in because no one saw it? All are considered unethical and immoral but some people count it as less a sin compared to say murder , rape , suicide etc.

Did you know that protesting in the entrance to an Abortion clinic is considered against the law and yet some people do it anyway because they consider abortion murder. So everyone breaks the law in different ways and rationalizes away THEIR reasons for doing so. THe only person I know without sin was beaten and nailed to a cross- and left there till he died. When anyone on this board can meet that standard I will listen to your arguments about ethics and morals on moving.

IN the end "moving " is more like civil disobedience, like protesting. When we "move" we are protesting the 1950s laws that need to be changed so we can all enjoy network programming in HD or even SD if no other networks exist in your area.

There are still several dmas(40 or more) that haven't even been added yet on the satellite in sd and they don't even have all their networks in that dma. Some have CBS and Pbs and no other networks. So we should deny them access to the other networks because of antiquated laws that are still on the books?

The law needs to be changed period. It is a stupid law and it only exists because of the powerful Nab lobby group in Washington. Till that happens there will always be " movers".

 

[Zero327]

Legal yes.
Ethical/Moral no.

The worst thing to happen if you get caught moving is you lose the locals you "moved" for.

Actually the worst thing that can happen is you're taken to court for charges of contractual breach, business fraud and falsified statements, and pay out 50-100k and do 5 years. But who's counting...

 

[pabeader]

Contract? I didn't sign no contract. Did you? Silly you!

 

[cj9788]

Actually the worst thing that can happen is you're taken to court for charges of contractual breach, business fraud and falsified statements, and pay out 50-100k and do 5 years. But who's counting...

Yeah that has happened to the many people who have admitted to moving. NOT!!

Taken to court by who???

The sat company will not have any liabilites as long as they cut your signals off. Maybe you should read shevra. The penalties only apply to a sat carrier who knownigly allows you to receive locals you are not allowed to receive.

BTW this is completly diffrent than the trouble E* got into over DNS.

Also I have made this challenge befor and no one has ever met it. The challenge is to find any law Federal State or local that specificly would cover moving as fraud. For an act to be fraud you have to steal something. Under the current laws receiving tv from outside your DMA is only a crime if your sat company allows you to continue to receive locals from outside you DMA and they knowinly allow it.


Nice try but BZZZZZZ.