What a retired Judge explained to me...

[Tampa8]

Neighbor in Florida is a retired Judge. (Civil not Criminal) He is housebound and I visit him when I am there. We got on the subject of Dish and the missing channels. (He has Brighthouse been thinking of going to Direct or Dish)

Interesting that he said at some point people might be able to get out of their contracts, (Important --- I am not looking to leave Dish at all)
It would be in the form of a class action suit. It would take the need to be shown that Dish could carry the stations, but chooses not to.

The explanation is, if it is temporary or not in the control of Dish, you would not be able to win in Court. But if Dish chooses not to pay the cost of a channel you had when you signed the contract and not carry it without giving the option for you to get that channel the Court might side with the consumer.

That last bold part is the important part. The Court might find Dish has the right to change packages per the contract but must give the option to still receive the channel even if it means an additonal charge to the customer if they want to keep it. The consumer might not like the option, but Dish would have to give it to keep the contract valid.
He said this would be very close to the Court deciding A la Carte would fix the problem industry wide............Very interesting way to look at it.....Not so much that it would go against Dish, but more the Court deciding this would be a remedy......

 

[garys]

You would probably want to have as many people involved on your end to make it worth the legal fees required.

 

[Peter Parker]

There was someone who claimed he was going to file a class action suit over the loss of VOOM as well. It never went anywhere. Let us know how this one goes.

 

[cditty]

While not in favor of the class action suit, I would be in favor of Dish telling fox we will pay you x per subscriber as you request, but will make a Fox add on package and let the consumer decide if it is worth it.

 

[zim2dive]

He said this would be very close to the Court deciding A la Carte would fix the problem industry wide............Very interesting way to look at it.....Not so much that it would go against Dish, but more the Court deciding this would be a remedy......

Every channel comes with its own price.. yes that would be an interesting way to back in to a la carte...

But, the word is that Fox pulled the channels.. and they would not turn them back on for this.. they want EVERY sub paying for them.. so I think Dish is in the clear.

 

[Roxor]

Since Dish has given the customers channels most do not pay for while certain channels are gone (and you do not complain), you are in effect accepting their offer to resolve the problem of the missing channels. It's just like when an insurance company offers you a check and hopes you will cash it; then you cannot sue for more. Likewise, the only customers who could possibly be in a class action suit would be those who already pay for the channels Dish is giving free to other customers now. For us AEP customers the NFL Zone would be nice.

 

[kvnfl]

Section 3.2 of your Dish Network contract covers changes in channels and fees. It happens, but you are still bound to the contract.

 

[Bonneville44]

Covers Dish Network changing channels, not the providers pulling them, and also I believe says notice will be given.

 

[Peter Parker]

Covers Dish Network changing channels, not the providers pulling them, and also I believe says notice will be given.

"Changes in Services Offered. We may add, delete, rearrange and/or change any and all programming, programming packages and other Services that we offer, as well as the prices and fees related to such programming, programming packages and Services, at any time, including without limitation, during any term commitment period to which you have agreed. If a change affects you, we will notify you of such change and its effective date. In the event that we delete, rearrange or change any programming, programming packages or other Services, we have no obligation to replace or supplement such programming, programming packages or other Services. You are not entitled to any refund because of a deletion, rearrangement or change of any programming, programming packages or other Services."

 

[navychop]

I believe this judge is ignoring that his remedy is not an option. Providers do not want their channels a la carte and will not go along. Dish would love it if they would.

 

[kvnfl]

Thanks Geronimo. Could not find a cut and paste version.

 

[DishSubLA]

Yeah, and a different retired judge (civil not criminal) would say that Dish wouldn't lose or has the right to change. Just like in real life, original judge rules in favor or plaintiff, but on appeal, that judge sides with defendant, then on that appeal, that judge throws the whole case out and orders a new trial . . . and on and on and on.

The problem is that the law is a philosophy, not a science, and so when a judge gives his OPINION it is an exercise in logic and argumentation where an equally qualified and intelligent judge can argue with the same sound basis in the law that Dish hasn't a thing to worry about in regards of lawsuits.

Also, class action suits always benifit the lawyers to the tune of millions of dollars and provide those in the "class" (we poor plebeians) with a coupon for $5, or in Dish's case, one free movie PPV, as the payment. Interesting opinion as mere academics.

 

[JayStil]

"Changes in Services Offered. We may add, delete, rearrange and/or change any and all programming, programming packages and other Services that we offer, as well as the prices and fees related to such programming, programming packages and Services, at any time, including without limitation, during any term commitment period to which you have agreed. If a change affects you, we will notify you of such change and its effective date. In the event that we delete, rearrange or change any programming, programming packages or other Services, we have no obligation to replace or supplement such programming, programming packages or other Services. You are not entitled to any refund because of a deletion, rearrangement or change of any programming, programming packages or other Services."

Contracts are made to be challenged. Say hypothetically DISH drops everything but QVC. You're going to keep paying your $64.99 for AT250 for the remainder of your 2 year commitment?

I agree a class action suit is a waste of time. But I also think that DISH's contract language doesn't give them free reign to do whatever they want. There's a line where a challenge to the contract would most certainly be successful. Defining that line is the question.

 

[Bill_KY]

Couldn't a class action result in a change of business procedures rather than a monetary award be more productive? I agree that a one time financial award of $5 to every Dish subscriber would not benefit anyone. An award of forcing Dish (and other providers) to go À la carte would do more to benefit the consumer. If Dish lost, then other providers might have to change their practices as well to avoid a class action.

But therein lies the problem, if Dish loses and is forced to change to A la Carte, what if Fox and the other program providers refuse to play along and allow their channels to be offered that way. Like how could Dish offer A La carte if the program providers refuse to let them offer their channels that way? It is a catch 22 situation...

However IF Fox and other program providers could ALSO be the target of this class action. Maybe a class action could 'shake things up' in favor of the consumer. If that were the case, then if Dish lost the class action...then Fox and other program providers would be enjoined ('forced') to comply with A La Carte.

While some could argue that the free market is at play here. One could use the supermarket analogy of if you want to buy a loaf of bread, milk and eggs. No one should force you to buy forty other products from the supermarket just to get that loaf of bread, milk and eggs.

Some might argue that using the supermarket analogy is not fair and that there are overhead costs involved. Agreed. However one could counter that claim with the Sams Club analogy. You have to pay a yearly membership fee there, but if you want a loaf of bread, milk and eggs and nothing else. You may do so without being forced to buy forty or fifty other items to get that bread, milk and eggs.

So whether you shop at Sams, Walmart or Krogers, you don't have to buy forty items in order to get the three items that you want. Those stores do not charge you to use their shopping carts while shopping, they do not charge you for the air conditioning or heating in the stores nor do they charge you for the use of their bathroom if you need it. You buy what you want, pay for it and leave...no additional charges...except in the case of a Sams membership.

So suppose you have to pay a yearly membership fee to Dish, but then if you only want three items or thirty items pay for it and that is it. Does that sound fair? Sure it does.

So what about Equipment like the STB, dish and installation? So how do other services work? Prepaid cell phones, you have to buy the phone and then pay up front in order to use the minutes. Sounds pretty fair.

So...you want satellite service. Buy the equipment and pay for installation, pay a yearly fee, pay in advance and pick the channels that you want. Sounds simple..

 

[sratson]

Doesn't the fact that Fox is a major network that is supposed to be available in all local markets require Dish to carry it? Isn't that why Dish is finally gearing up to carry PBS in HD now in all markets by a particular date (escapes me)?

 

[bob_stan]

Dish is willing to carry it. They are not willing to pay what Fox demands as payment. There is a difference.

 

[Greg Bimson]

However IF Fox and other program providers could ALSO be the target of this class action. Maybe a class action could 'shake things up' in favor of the consumer. If that were the case, then if Dish lost the class action...then Fox and other program providers would be enjoined ('forced') to comply with A La Carte.

There is a class-action in California right now. I don't remember all of the parties being sued, but the top four MSO's and the top four networks are all being sued.

While some could argue that the free market is at play here. One could use the supermarket analogy of if you want to buy a loaf of bread, milk and eggs. No one should force you to buy forty other products from the supermarket just to get that loaf of bread, milk and eggs.

Oh, there is a big difference...

The supermarket advertises milk for $3.50 a gallon. That's what they sell it at. No packaging required.

The MSO's don't sell just ESPN. They sell the packages they created. So the people forcing you to purchase packages are the distributors themselves.

 

[Bill_KY]

There is a class-action in California right now. I don't remember all of the parties being sued, but the top four MSO's and the top four networks are all being sued.Oh, there is a big difference...

The supermarket advertises milk for $3.50 a gallon. That's what they sell it at. No packaging required.

The MSO's don't sell just ESPN. They sell the packages they created. So the people forcing you to purchase packages are the distributors themselves.

Packages.... I'm glad you mentioned that. Lets use the 'supermarket analogy' again. Suppose someone wants milk, bread, eggs and English muffins. But the English muffins. come in a package of 6. They decide to buy that package, even though they prefer just 2 English muffins. Even with buying that package of six English muffins., they only end up buying four separate items which probably comes in under $10.

The point of this is that no one required anyone buy a minimum of $50 worth of groceries in order to buy just the milk, bread, eggs and English muffins..

.

 

[MCSuckaDJ]

Packages.... I'm glad you mentioned that. Lets use the 'supermarket analogy' again. Suppose someone wants milk, bread, eggs and English muffins. But the English muffins. come in a package of 6. They decide to buy that package, even though they prefer just 2 English muffins. Even with buying that package of six English muffins., they only end up buying four separate items which probably comes in under $10.

The point of this is that no one required anyone buy a minimum of $50 worth of groceries in order to buy just the milk, bread, eggs and English muffins..

.

That's an incomplete analogy, because eventually the English muffin maker acquires a ginger pickling plant, and tells the supermarket, "if you want to sell my muffins, you also have to sell my pickled ginger to people who otherwise might not want pickled ginger."

It's bundling that's inevitable, not á la carte. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[bryanw20]

"Changes in Services Offered. We may add, delete, rearrange and/or change any and all programming, programming packages and other Services that we offer, as well as the prices and fees related to such programming, programming packages and Services, at any time, including without limitation, during any term commitment period to which you have agreed. If a change affects you, we will notify you of such change and its effective date. In the event that we delete, rearrange or change any programming, programming packages or other Services, we have no obligation to replace or supplement such programming, programming packages or other Services. You are not entitled to any refund because of a deletion, rearrangement or change of any programming, programming packages or other Services."

What about that line in the contract? I do not recall ever getting such notification. I just happen to be viewing a site, and saw a banner add from FOX about Dish, and thought, yeah right, Dish won't pull Fox Sports mid Football season!