SatelliteGuys Makes The Court Case
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 251
- Views 24K
Reading a post like that, the lawyers for the networks simply need to call NPS themselves and try and order distant networks. Hell, they can even have a true, 'white area' address available, but seeing as they likely won't get past the phone # step in the process, it won't be needed.
Another day... Another mention of SatelliteGuys in the court proceedings. 
This time from Echostar.
Happy reading.
This time from Echostar.
Happy reading.
I like the Optomitrist precedent, that may be Echostar's vehicle to dismissing the new NDS injuction request.
I'm surprised they entered into evidence a blog of the Charlie Chat instead of the Chat itself. As Scott mentioned, anything posted here is heresay, but the Chat itself would be admissable.
It seems to me like NPS will only activate distant network channels for those that were previously or currently subscribed to Dish Network. I'm sure this would not help them in court as it would prove that this was done just for their customers.
Thats because the NAB has not entered the actual Special Charlie Chat into evidence. They just entered our racap into evidence. Dish is just replying to the NAB's complaint, no reason for them to enter the real chat into evidence when they are just replying to the "evidence" the NAB submitted.
I understand Dish referring to our recap, since NAB entered that as evidence.
I was posting that I was surprised that NAB didn't enter the Chat, and entered the thread instead.
The thread was entered because it is the only copy of the special Charlie Chat that could be referenced. Because it is CEO Ergen speaking to the relationship with NPS/AAD and the categories of the distant network subscribers, this can be submitted into a court of law.
Because of the existance of a Group A, those Dish Network subscribers that also purchase local channels, and Mr. Ergen's supposition that those customers cannot receive distant network feeds from anyone, it throws into doubt the validity that Dish Network and NPS aren't working together.
Because of the existance of a Group A, those Dish Network subscribers that also purchase local channels, and Mr. Ergen's supposition that those customers cannot receive distant network feeds from anyone, it throws into doubt the validity that Dish Network and NPS aren't working together.
So, if I started a post that said:
"In a very special charlie chat, charlie himself said that NPS is providing distances to everyone and funneling every dime back to his personal account. But don't tell anyone about this, wink wink nudge nudge."
Then NAB would enter that into evidence and actually believe it is admissable, as opposed to an actual copy of that chat?
Pretty much thats what they did with the posting mentioned in the OP
"In a very special charlie chat, charlie himself said that NPS is providing distances to everyone and funneling every dime back to his personal account. But don't tell anyone about this, wink wink nudge nudge."
Then NAB would enter that into evidence and actually believe it is admissable, as opposed to an actual copy of that chat?
Pretty much thats what they did with the posting mentioned in the OP
No, that isn't essentially what was done.
The first SatelliteGuys post used in the case was the one that not only did screen captures of the chat, but also had mp3's of CEO Ergen explaining the problem and the solution.
Unlike any of the statements made on this board, which are not admissble unless anyone wants to go to Florida, the Charlie Chat itself is permissible, as CEO Ergen discussed the options. Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, the only place they could get a copy of the chat was to see it here.
One of the major issues right now is this "Group A" subscriber base. These customers subscribing to locals through Dish Network should be able to receive distant networks through NPS/AAD if they qualify, which is in direct contradiction to what CEO Ergen said.
The first SatelliteGuys post used in the case was the one that not only did screen captures of the chat, but also had mp3's of CEO Ergen explaining the problem and the solution.
Unlike any of the statements made on this board, which are not admissble unless anyone wants to go to Florida, the Charlie Chat itself is permissible, as CEO Ergen discussed the options. Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, the only place they could get a copy of the chat was to see it here.
One of the major issues right now is this "Group A" subscriber base. These customers subscribing to locals through Dish Network should be able to receive distant networks through NPS/AAD if they qualify, which is in direct contradiction to what CEO Ergen said.
I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think any of it is considered evidence. They (plaintiffs) are only providing (derogatory) comments to try and have the court authorize a "Fishing Expedition" conducted by "Plaintiffs" to show that "Dish and Symposium" are in concert; and that is only if the judge says his injunction does include "arms length deals" with the whole world.
In any case, their response brief/arguments are impressive.
In any case, their response brief/arguments are impressive.
Hey, E* has been reading my posts. See page 10 Section B.Another day... Another mention of SatelliteGuys in the court proceedings.
This time from Echostar.
Happy reading.
That was my argument. http://www.satelliteguys.us/showpost.php?p=738236&postcount=97
Last edited:
Read the "Povenmire Declaration". Did anyone else find it curious? It was interesting for several reasons. Wasn't Rex a Dish Network employee? I seem to recall he was one of the VPs at Echostar. Now it says he is an independent contractor as of August 1.
The declartion says that "effective December 1, 2006, EchoStar has sent disconnect commands for distant network programming to all of its Distant Network subscribers."
Technically that doesn't seem correct. Unless E* moved the distant network cities to spot beams - they are still sending distant network signals to every Dish in America aimed at the 119 orbital location (I think). What E* did is send a notification to every set top box outside the DMA of the distant home markets to stop descrambling distant channels and to remove distant network channels from the program guide.
If for some reason the set top box never got the signal or the set top box were prevented from updating, then some users may still have distant networks. One time I had a software glitch with an old 4900 receiver. One weekend I had every pay-per-view movie in the clear. I watched about 30 minutes of a movie to see if it would charge me - it didn't, so I called Tech Support to report the problem. They did a "hit" on my smart card receiver and the "problem" went away. That doesn't even cover hacking.
Also, how does Rex Povenmire know? He could not have witnessed an E* employee "throwing the switch" on December 1, since customers were being dropped throughout the month of November. About the only thing he could do is look at some kind of audit report on the software that updates the receivers.
What about the report from Nebraska that E* didn't cut off customers in the North Platte DMA until AFTER the OU-NU game on Saturday night, Dec. 2?
The only sure way to eliminate the distants is to stop uploading them to the transponders that cover the entire US. But that might screw up the locals. Curious.
The declartion says that "effective December 1, 2006, EchoStar has sent disconnect commands for distant network programming to all of its Distant Network subscribers."
Technically that doesn't seem correct. Unless E* moved the distant network cities to spot beams - they are still sending distant network signals to every Dish in America aimed at the 119 orbital location (I think). What E* did is send a notification to every set top box outside the DMA of the distant home markets to stop descrambling distant channels and to remove distant network channels from the program guide.
If for some reason the set top box never got the signal or the set top box were prevented from updating, then some users may still have distant networks. One time I had a software glitch with an old 4900 receiver. One weekend I had every pay-per-view movie in the clear. I watched about 30 minutes of a movie to see if it would charge me - it didn't, so I called Tech Support to report the problem. They did a "hit" on my smart card receiver and the "problem" went away. That doesn't even cover hacking.
Also, how does Rex Povenmire know? He could not have witnessed an E* employee "throwing the switch" on December 1, since customers were being dropped throughout the month of November. About the only thing he could do is look at some kind of audit report on the software that updates the receivers.
What about the report from Nebraska that E* didn't cut off customers in the North Platte DMA until AFTER the OU-NU game on Saturday night, Dec. 2?
The only sure way to eliminate the distants is to stop uploading them to the transponders that cover the entire US. But that might screw up the locals. Curious.
Dish has stopped distant networks for those who subscribed, no matter if they are on conus or spotbeams has nothing to do with anything. There is no requirement that Dish carry network signals on Spot Beams only.
In fact if dish could carry them only on spot beams they would, which would open up some much needed conus space.
In fact if dish could carry them only on spot beams they would, which would open up some much needed conus space.
Like I said, everything from this site is not admissible in court, but the Charlie Chat screenshots and the mp3's of CEO Ergen are. Even if they are from this site.SmityWhity said:
I agree with you on what actually happened. I was commenting on what Rex Povenmire said happened, which doesn't seem entirely accurate. It was poorly worded.
He should have said something like: "As of 11:59pm EST, 12/1/2006 Echostar stopped selling distant networks to all subscribers and issued commands to every satellite receiver to stop receiving network signals outside their designated market area."
So if you have a service address in NY, Chicago, Denver, or LA, then you are still getting the very same distant network signal as local into local over CONUS.
Seems like a big waste of bandwidth.
Guess you can get ridiculous here!
The hackers will have their own day in (criminal) court.
What you are trying to say is, "Dish needs to stop re-broadcasting all locals" since none of the spotbeams cover just one DMA, except for maybe Utah.
