Should we have a Canadian Satellite Forum [Archive]

JWT

10-30-02, 01:23 AM

I say yes, as a good number of us errrrr,ummmmm,uhmmm kinda sorta already own a BEV or SC system.

If we do get a Canadian DBS Forum does this mean the Dish Network PVR forum would then become the E* & BEV PVR forum as well?

I really like having BEV to compliment what I get from DTV and E*. Sure some things are alot of repeats, but channels such as: BBC World, EDGE TV, the actual feed of radio stations from across Canada such as CFNY Edge 102 from Toronto, a decent amount of free French channels, a rather reasonable fee for DW, really good timeshifting for every show you can think of, and free NFL football and MLB baseball games lifted from off of the various channels offered on BEV whether you subscribe to them of not is what makes owning one of these things so great. But my favourite channels to watch when there is nothing else on is CP24 which shows the live traffic camera feeds from various points around Toronto, and you almost want to laugh at the poor suckers when you see them caught in the 5 o`clock rush in absolute gridlock on the 401. ;)

But alas, I`m afraid what makes these system so attractive ( but not better than their American counterparts ) is what eventually will become their downfall due to a legal battle in this country because so many copyright issues can and will be broken if too many people get these.

John Q Public

10-30-02, 06:35 AM

No. There are already lots of Canadian DTH forums in existance such as Kusat's www.canadian-tv.com/forums; Virtual Help www.virtualelectronics.com/forum and Digital Home Canada www.digitalhomecanada.com plus a few others. None of them allow talk of security issues.

As others have mentioned, there is lots to lose (especially waving something in the front of the NAB) that could spell service loses to "southern" subscibers of Expressvu & SC.

You can imagine what would happen in the US if the ratio of foreign dishes reaches the same amount as Canada. (would equal about 7 million in US). One needs 2 services, 1 American + 1 Canadian; where ever 1 lives in North America just to get all the services that were available on BUDs in the 80's)

Let's keep this semi-secret a semi secret

signed a DirecTV + Star Choice sub

billmarc

10-30-02, 07:02 AM

So what happened to this great idea of a "Free Trade Agreement?" We should be able to purchase subscriptions to each other's DBS offerings.

Karl Foster

10-30-02, 07:35 AM

Maybe you should, but for now it is not legal - write your congressman.

Dave Johnson

10-30-02, 08:06 AM

As a Canadian member here. I think a Canadian forum is a good idea as long as legal issues aren`t brought into the discussions. Just talking about equipment,programming or other issues related to the equipment should be fine.

Tim

10-30-02, 12:39 PM

Let's keep this semi-secret a semi secret

:righton: -- I agree 100%.

Will the Canadian forum go right underneath the new How to "move" to get different locals forum :shrug:

James_F

10-30-02, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by Dave Johnson
As a Canadian member here. I think a Canadian forum is a good idea as long as legal issues aren`t brought into the discussions. Just talking about equipment,programming or other issues related to the equipment should be fine.

Well that will happen day one! How many questions about getting BEV in the US will appear? The more I think about it, the more I feel its a bad idea. Why should DBSTalk.com have to moderate people who are engaged in illegal activities?

Geronimo

10-30-02, 01:17 PM

The questions about getting Canadian services in the US and vice versa appear now.

James_F

10-30-02, 01:45 PM

True, but not in volume. A Canadian DBS forum would make that much larger.

lkw

10-30-02, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by James_F

Well that will happen day one! How many questions about getting BEV in the US will appear? The more I think about it, the more I feel its a bad idea. Why should DBSTalk.com have to moderate people who are engaged in illegal activities?

Getting a grey market service is NOT illegal in the U.S.

There is absolutely no American law that prohibits Americans to subscribe to foreign services. I've been in this argument for years. No one can ever cite an American law prohibiting such subscriptions. In Canada, we know there is a supreme court clarification on subbing American DBS this past April, making it illegal to sub, but there is no such issue in the U.S.

Ask Zuma Hans, the moderator in Satellite radio. He tried to get into legal and ethic issue on subbing grey market, and eventually he had to give up. We had been trading barbs since May.

As for Canadian DBS would threaten Directv/Dish Network on subscriber base in the U.S., who are we kidding here? I bet 99% of American TV viewers have no clue what BEV or *C is. It's safe to say that 99.99999% have no interest in the programming of Canadian content. Amercian-centric attitude is at its best here.

For those who are interested, this issue is often discussed in alt.dbs.canada in netnews. Check out this thread:

http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=ZnpP8.13910%24%25p4.669692%40weber.videotr on.net&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dalt.dbs.canada%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26hl%3Den

James_F

10-30-02, 02:42 PM

Giving me some Google Groups link doesn't prove a damn thing. Can you sub in the US with BEV or Starchoices permission? No You can't purchase any PPV since you need a phone line.

Please don't even start this with me. Show me where you have permission from any Canadian DBS company to use their service in the US? Canadian DBS is a huge threat since they don't own the rights to the market. No wonder DirecTV and Ecostar are against them being here.

If you are going to steal programming from another country, then I have a problem with that as do many people.

Steve Mehs

10-30-02, 04:07 PM

How is it stealing if you pay for it. BEV or *C gets their money out of it.

James_F

10-30-02, 04:11 PM

Uh, you are stealing from US broadcasters. Both system don't have rights in the US as far as I can tell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't DirecTV and Dish pay for the rights to broadcast the shows to the US? I don't believe either Canadian system pays to have the rights to distribute all over the US. Please correct me and I'll keep quite.

lkw

10-30-02, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by James_F
Giving me some Google Groups link doesn't prove a damn thing. Can you sub in the US with BEV or Starchoices permission? No You can't purchase any PPV since you need a phone line.

If I don't need to purchase PPV, so why is that an issue?

Please don't even start this with me. Show me where you have permission from any Canadian DBS company to use their service in the US?

Show me how this is a ***LEGAL*** issue to begin with. It's *C and BEV's ***BUSINESS PRACTICE*** not to sell their service to Americans, because if they do that, they would be subject to potential lawsuits (from DTV and Dish) for intruding the American market. So they are playing it safe by NOT knowingly selling to Americans.

On the other hand, this has nothing to do with American law. No American law covers this issue. In other words, the worst that an American subbing *C/BEV is to have them knowing your physical location, and shut you off. The worst is not go to an American jail as the subscriber breaks no law.

Canadian DBS is a huge threat since they don't own the rights to the market. No wonder DirecTV and Ecostar are against them being here.

Hugh threat? do you think grey market subs in the U.S. rival grey market subs in Canada in

- absolute # (estimates from 300K to 600K)
- in %

Canadian grey market subs is a drop in the ocean in the U.S. That's why I said 99.9999% of Americans have no clue what BEV/*C is.

If you are going to steal programming from another country, then I have a problem with that as do many people.

We are talking about ***SUBSCRIBING*** Canadian service. Read my lips: SUBSCRIBING. It means you ***PAY*** for the programming. If you don't know what "sub" means, look it up in the dictionary.

Steve Mehs

10-30-02, 04:21 PM

I watch Canadian tv all the time, Osbourns uncensored, caught some Sorponos, my mom used to watch new 7th Heaven episodes a day before they were shown in the US, and a few blacked out Bills games . Whats the difference if I get them OTA or pay so I could have a little bit better PQ so I could focus my antenna on Rochester. Global TV (CIII-TV) probably has the most US programming (Including South Park), it's really great to watch network tv w/o those annoying election ads. CBC is great for Canadian originals, CTV very nice for US programming and TVO gives PBS a run for their money.

James_F

10-30-02, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by lkw

because if they do that, they would be subject to potential lawsuits (from DTV and Dish) for intruding the American market.

Of course they would because they don't own the rights to sell service to US citizens. Just because DirecTV or Dish hasn't sued them doesn't mean its ok.

We are talking about ***SUBSCRIBING*** Canadian service. Read my lips: SUBSCRIBING. It means you ***PAY*** for the programming. If you don't know what "sub" means, look it up in the dictionary.
You have no idea what the hell you are talking about. You are paying to watch the thing in Canada, not the US.

How about you figure out what the hell your point is and then try and tell me how hacking the system to watch Canadian DBS in the lower 48 is ok? Why should DirecTV or Dish even pay to send signal to the US if people are going to steal if from another system.

lkw

10-30-02, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by James_F
Uh, you are stealing from US broadcasters. Both system don't have rights in the US as far as I can tell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't DirecTV and Dish pay for the rights to broadcast the shows to the US? I don't believe either Canadian system pays to have the rights to distribute all over the US. Please correct me and I'll keep quite.

Rights is a funny thing. You have the rights to sell me a product in this country, but I don't have ANY obligation to buy it in this country, i.e. from you.

I've mentioned this in my argument with Hans, but I love to repeat this again and again. I've already done this for years:

- have you ever bought computer textbooks from Taiwan? The same textbooks in the U.S. that cost about 3-4 times of the price in Taiwan, published by Prentice Hall, Wiley, etc. Yes, some distributors have the rights to sell these books in America, but I have no obligation to buy these books ONLY IN AMERICA, if I manage to find a source overseas at a better price, for my personal use.

- have you ever bought CD, software, magazines, etc. in foreign countries and bring it back to the states for personal use? Unless U.S. customs prohibits copyrighted materials from entering the country (for personal use), every citizen is entitled to buy copyrighted materials outside the country and bring it back for personal use. These are our rights.

- have you seen the prescription drugs (especially Viagra) in Tijuana? Same drug that cost $10 per pop in the U.S. costs much cheaper in Tijjuana. The Tijuana pharmacia target this product to Americans who bring them back to the states for personal use.

What do all these lead to? you buy the rights to sell a product in the U.S. (DTV/Dish), but I have the freedom (and the law on my side) to buy the products from other countries.

lkw

10-30-02, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by James_F

You have no idea what the hell you are talking about. You are paying to watch the thing in Canada, not the US.

Really? is that a conjecture or is that the actual practice?

If I am paying to watching the thing in Canada, every IRD will be required to plug into the phone line. Since there is no such requirement, it means BEV/*C do NOT care.

How about you figure out what the hell your point is and then try and tell me how hacking the system to watch Canadian DBS in the lower 48 is ok?

See, how is paying for the service "hacking"? do you know what "hacking" means?

Why should DirecTV or Dish even pay to send signal to the US if people are going to steal if from another system.
Premise false. Ask me again after you elaborate how

"paying for service from BEV" == "stealing service from BEV".

or unless you can define:

"I find a better (cheaper) source for your product elsewhere" == "I steal from you"

There is a big problem with your mindset. You think since DTV/Dish Network bought the rights to sell DBS service in this coutnry, then I must have a lifetime binding, or contract, with DTV/Dish that if I want DBS, I must buy from you. The truth is, there is never such a contract stating that if I, an American, wants DBS service, then I MUST buy from DTV/Dish. And there is no such FCC law either.

James_F

10-30-02, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by lkw
- have you ever bought computer textbooks from Taiwan? The same textbooks in the U.S. that cost about 3-4 times of the price in Taiwan, published by Prentice Hall, Wiley, etc. Yes, some distributors have the rights to sell these books in America, but I have no obligation to buy these books ONLY IN AMERICA, if I manage to find a source overseas at a better price, for my personal use.
No I have not. I don't think its right.

- have you ever bought CD, software, magazines, etc. in foreign countries and bring it back to the states for personal use? Unless U.S. customs prohibits copyrighted materials from entering the country (for personal use), every citizen is entitled to buy copyrighted materials outside the country and bring it back for personal use. These are our rights.
Poor example. You aren't leaving the country to buy DBS. You are stealing it from across the border.
- have you seen the prescription drugs (especially Viagra) in Tijuana? Same drug that cost $10 per pop in the U.S. costs much cheaper in Tijjuana. The Tijuana pharmacia target this product to Americans who bring them back to the states for personal use.
Again poor example. You do have rights to do that. But a Mexican drug company can't sell Viagra in the US without permission from Pfizer. THEY DON'T OWN THE RIGHTS!!!!

What do all these lead to? you buy the rights to sell a product in the U.S. (DTV/Dish), but I have the freedom (and the law on my side) to buy the products from other countries.
Yes you do in all the cases you gave, but you are deceiving a Canadian company that you live in Canada and then viewing programs that they don't have rights to broadcast.

lkw

10-30-02, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by James_F

No I have not. I don't think its right.

What you "think" doesn't count. Only the law counts. I don't think it's right for you to criticize a legal behavior either.

Poor example. You aren't leaving the country to buy DBS. You are stealing it from across the border.

How is it stealing when I pay for the service?

Again poor example. You do have rights to do that. But a Mexican drug company can't sell Viagra in the US without permission from Pfizer. THEY DON'T OWN THE RIGHTS!!!!

So, what you mean is I have the right to buy a product from a foreign source, at a cheaper price, and bring it back to the U.S. for my personal use. How is the DBS service different?

Glad that you finally recognize the obvious.

Yes you do in all the cases you gave, but you are deceiving a Canadian company that you live in Canada and then viewing programs that they don't have rights to broadcast.

Deceive? how do you figure. If I enter a private transaction with you, you gave me information on your zodiac sign and your weight, yet I don't care about such information and bother to check it out. How does that constitute "deceive"?

All Canadian DBS cares is that you have a Canadian address. That's all they care. What they don't care is where you receive the service.

James_F

10-30-02, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by lkw

What you "think" doesn't count. Only the law counts. I don't think it's right for you to criticize a legal behavior either.
I never said that this was illegal. You asked me if I had ever done it.

How is it stealing when I pay for the service?

You aren't stealing the service. You are stealing the broadcast.

So, what you mean is I have the right to buy a product from a foreign source, at a cheaper price, and bring it back to the U.S. for my personal use. How is the DBS service different?

Because as I said, you aren't going to Canada and bringing back a product. You are gaining access to something you aren't allowed to have.

Deceive? how do you figure. If I enter a private transaction with you, you gave me information on your zodiac sign and your weight, yet I don't care about such information and bother to check it out. How does that constitute "deceive"?

All Canadian DBS cares is that you have a Canadian address. That's all they care. What they don't care is where you receive the service.
No they care, thats why they ask for your address...

James_F

10-30-02, 04:46 PM

Look if someone just shows me where they have the rights to distribute programming to the US, then I'll be quiet.

Steve Mehs

10-30-02, 04:53 PM

Again I ask, whats the difference if I get Canadian programming from an antenna or a satellite dish? I would be willing to pay to get the channels I already get if they were in near perfect PQ. If I already watch US programming from Canada what difference does it make.

lkw

10-30-02, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by James_F

I never said that this was illegal. You asked me if I had ever done it.

Nope, that stems from your statement:

"I don't think its right."

You aren't stealing the service. You are stealing the broadcast.

Absolutely false. I am paying for the broadcast, how does that constitute "stealing"?

I pay a cheaper price for the broadcast, just like I pay a cheaper price for Viagra from Tijuana or textbooks from Taiwan, but as you admit

- "I never said that this was illegal"
- "you have the rights to do that".

then it contradicts your claim that it's "stealing".

Because as I said, you aren't going to Canada and bringing back a product.

and why does it matter? Nowadays, you don't have to physically go to a country to buy a product and bring it back personally. You can do it over the phone and over the Internet. U.S.A. absolutely allows that, unlike some other totalitarian governments.

You are gaining access to something you aren't allowed to have.

Aren't allowed by whom?

- American law? it's legal
- the distributors (BEV)? all they care is that you have a Canadian address
- the content owners? they allow their products to be sold on a platform that does NOT require physical location verification
- Directv/Dish? I have entered no contract with Directv/Dish that if I want programming, that I must buy from them, so they have no rights to tell me who I can buy from.

so who doesn't allow it?

No they care, thats why they ask for your address...

Do you realize "a billing address" != "a receiving location"? If all they ask is a billing address, it means they don't care where you receive it.

James_F

10-30-02, 04:58 PM

Maybe they have that right built into their contract. I don't know. I am assuming that ExpressVU doesn't have rights to broadcast in the US. Otherwise why wouldn't they offer service? I have a friend in Buffalo and I know you can watch the TV signals, but maybe this is different somehow. I'll be the first to admit I don't have hard any proof that they can't sell in the US. All I know is you need a Canadian address to get the service. Ethics aside, it just looks like they don't have the right to sell their service to the US market. Now is it ethical to hack the system, I don't think so, but I'm not in the mood to debate that since its been covered.

James_F

10-30-02, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by lkw
Do you realize "a billing address" != "a receiving location"? If all they ask is a billing address, it means they don't care where you receive it.

OK call up ExpressVU and tell them you live in the US. What will they say?

lkw

10-30-02, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by James_F
Maybe they have that right built into their contract. I don't know. I am assuming that ExpressVU doesn't have rights to broadcast in the US. Otherwise why wouldn't they offer service? I have a friend in Buffalo and I know you can watch the TV signals, but maybe this is different somehow. I'll be the first to admit I don't have hard any proof that they can't sell in the US.

As I say, you have to distinguish:

- their rights to sell into the U.S.
- my rights to buy from Canada

These are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!! That's why it's called grey market. By definition, grey market is legal. If it's illegal, it's called black market.

All I know is you need a Canadian address to get the service.

Do you really think that an address == the location of the reception? Some people use a PO Box as the address, do you think people can jam a dish and a receiver in the PO Box?

Ethics aside, it just looks like they don't have the right to sell their service to the US market.

That should read: they don't have the rights to sell their service to an American address. That's all.

Now is it ethical to hack the system, I don't think so, but I'm not in the mood to debate that since its been covered.

Why would people have to resort to discuss hacking when this whole issue is about "subbing"?

lkw

10-30-02, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by James_F

OK call up ExpressVU and tell them you live in the US. What will they say?

Why should I? it's their business practice not to sell to Americans, why would I do that to have them shut me off?

Besides, if they really care, just enforce the phone line requirement. Why is "calling them up and tell them" the only way to review my physical location?

jrjcd

10-30-02, 05:10 PM

surprise boys and girls-subscribing to BE is just a hassle-it's neither illegal nor unethical....

WHEN i make the switch, i'll sleep well at night....HAHAHAHAHA

James_F

10-30-02, 05:19 PM

Look thats fine, I really don't care what you guys do. Chris asked how we felt about this and I listed my points. Just because you can do something doesn't make it right.

Tim

10-30-02, 06:58 PM

I sub to Expressvu.. so I am not holier than thou here but...

Ikw- do not confuse Bev's interests with the content provider's interests. Sure Bev wants my money, but travelling further down the food chain- my local networks and American cable channels have paid for the right to want my money. So who do you think wants it more?

I see and hear the term "rights" thrown around. Do we have the "right" to purchase Canadian programming? NO! Why? Because we did not pay to produce that programming. I will get into Mr. Hans' corner here by saying God Bless the producers/developers/writers/Sugardaddy's who combine to create ____________ (insert favorite show here). They are the rights holders here, not us.

Televison is not a right. Being able to pay somebody 50 bones to move you from Chicago to Onatrio is a luxury, not a right.

lkw

10-30-02, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by Tim
I sub to Expressvu.. so I am not holier than thou here but...

Ikw- do not confuse Bev's interests with the content provider's interests.

Nowhere in any threads in my argument confuse these two entities. Look, the content owner gets paid, the chain is

subscriber => BEV => channel (e.g. TSN) => content owner (e.g. NHL)

or for locally produced contents

subscriber => BEV => content owner (e.g. TSN's SportsCentre, or local news on CBC Ontario)

the latter are contents no American right holders own.

The one who doesn't get paid here is ESPN and Directv/Dish. But hey, when a product (e.g. NHL) is available from multiple sources and I can find the cheaper and better source, all power to me.

Sure Bev wants my money, but travelling further down the food chain- my local networks and American cable channels have paid for the right to want my money. So who do you think wants it more?

That's EXACTLY the issue here. You (the American right holders) pay for the rights to want my money, but I have NO OBLIGATION to give you the business. As long as this behavior (of buying from a foreign source) is legal, as the law doesn't prohibit it, you can pay all you want to try to get my money, but I have all the rights to give the business to someone else.

Look, this is a loophole. As long as this loophole is not closed, you (as an American rights holder) have no beef. And this loophole is hardly an issue that warrants any new law in the U.S., primarily because Americans subbing to foreign DBS is a drop in the ocean. It's an issue in Canada because American DBS is a big threat to Canadian DBS. The relative popularity of the other side's DBS is the determining factor here.

I see and hear the term "rights" thrown around. Do we have the "right" to purchase Canadian programming?

Absolutely YES. This is called free market.

NO! Why? Because we did not pay to produce that programming.

I have the rights to buy it, as long as the seller is willing to sell it and the transaction is legal. I don't have to pay to produce that product to have the "purchase" rights. Which one of that is not true?

- BEV is willing to sell its product to someone with **MERELY** a Canadian address? or
- buying foreign DBS is legal in the U.S.?

Karl Foster

10-30-02, 08:08 PM

lkw -

If there are no concerns about having Canadian DBS in the US, why isn't your name and location listed?

Here is the EXACT wording from the Bell Expressvu user agreement. It is found at http://www.bell.ca/shop/en/jsp/content/cust_care/pdfdocs/sub_agreement.pdf:

..."Whenever we refer to "you" or the "Subscriber," we are reffering to you, as a subscriber of ExpressVu's Programming in Canada"...

..."Each IRD is assigned a service address by ExpressVu, which represents the greographical location of the IRD. ExpressVu reserves the right to verify that the service address in in compliance with ExpressVu policies, which currently require the address to be in Canada"...

..."ExpressVu requires that all IRD units be directly and continuously connected to an operating telephone line in Canada. Any exception to this rule must be approved by ExpressVu prior to activation. Connection to an operating telephone line is a condition of our granting you the right to receive adn view the Programming and we may, in our discretion, disconnect some or all Programming if we determine that the IRD is not connected"...

If you think it is not unethical for you to violate a user agreement in order to obtain service granted under that agreement, you need to take an ethics class.

Tim

10-30-02, 08:11 PM

Nowhere in any threads in my argument confuse these two entities

By saying this...
BEV is willing to sell its product to someone with **MERELY** a Canadian address
You are leaving out the other side of the equation- that being the rights holders.

I'll agree that the word "legal" is probably not applicable here. Maybe "kosher" is what I'm after.

What makes being able to sub to Bev kosher- because I can find a broker through the internet? I can also find hundreds of places on the internet that will hack a card for me. Is that kosher?

Look, I like my Bev. But I won't pretend that I have a right to it. I like Cuban cigars too :)

lkw

10-30-02, 08:41 PM

Originally posted by karl_f
lkw -

If there are no concerns about having Canadian DBS in the US, why isn't your name and location listed?

Because as I said, why should I reveal the location to BEV to get shut down? BEV cannot ***KNOWINGLY*** sell to Americans. Notice the word "KNOWINGLY".

..."Each IRD is assigned a service address by ExpressVu, which represents the greographical location of the IRD. ExpressVu reserves the right to verify that the service address in in compliance with ExpressVu policies, which currently require the address to be in Canada"...

And why do you think BEV reserves that right but do NOT exercise that rights, i.e. check that the IRD is in fact in Canada, by sending out technicians to randomly verify that the IRD is indeed at that address (as they do in Mexican DBS), and requires the phone line to plug in.

..."ExpressVu requires that all IRD units be directly and continuously connected to an operating telephone line in Canada. Any exception to this rule must be approved by ExpressVu prior to activation. Connection to an operating telephone line is a condition of our granting you the right to receive adn view the Programming and we may, in our discretion, disconnect some or all Programming if we determine that the IRD is not connected"...

Yes, go ask BEV why they put these terms in an agreement but never enforce it. Can you think of any reason?

If you think it is not unethical for you to violate a user agreement in order to obtain service granted under that agreement, you need to take an ethics class.
Not at all. It's a private transaction. It's up to at least one side to uphold any terms in the agreements. If neither side cares about the accuracy of the terms, who are you to intervene?

Just like if you sign an agreement to buy something from me, you give out a false birthdate. But I don't care about the accuracy of your birthdate in this transaction. The birthdate has no relevance to this transaction/product, and you are not a minor. I get the money, you get the goods. Both sides are happy, so what damage does this "violate a user agreement" do?

lkw

10-30-02, 08:50 PM

Originally posted by Tim

By saying this...

You are leaving out the other side of the equation- that being the rights holders.

What right holders?

First of all, I wonder why in this argument, your school always has to assume for each program in BEV, there is a corresponding American right holders that get screwed. As a matter of fact, you are not the first one having that line of reasoning.

Repeat after me: lots of programs on BEV have no American right holders. For starter, look at the French content from Quebec. One reason French Canadians snowbirds want BEV in Florida is because they can't get any of such contents from American providers.

Now, if you think Directv/dish forms a totalitarian government that
"if you don't watch TV (American contents) from us then you can't watch TV, Canadian (French) content is outlawed here", then you have a bigger problem than I thought.

I'll agree that the word "legal" is probably not applicable here. Maybe "kosher" is what I'm after.

What makes being able to sub to Bev kosher- because I can find a broker through the internet? I can also find hundreds of places on the internet that will hack a card for me. Is that kosher?

See, your school also has this problem of staying within the context. When there is no way to argue against subbing, always turn to argue against "hacking".

I wonder why your school can't honestly argue against grey market sub without bringing up hacking...

Karl Foster

10-30-02, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by lkw

Not at all. It's a private transaction. It's up to BOTH sides to uphold any terms in the agreements. If neither side cares about the accuracy of the terms, who are you to intervene?

So I guess the end justifies the means. That is a very utiliatarian view of ethics. I follow the Kantian view of ethics that a person does the right thing because it is the right thing. YMMV, but if you're not doing anything wrong, why do you hide your identity?

If you have no problem violating user agreements, that is your business, but there is no place in this forum for people who knowingly receive service they are not entitled to IMHO.

A Canadian forum must be limited to Canadian subscribers who do not violate user agreements in order to receive service IMHO.

lkw

10-30-02, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by karl_f

So I guess the end justifies the means. That is a very utiliatarian view of ethics. I follow the Kantian view of ethics that a person does the right thing because it is the right thing.

I totally agree. I think an American subbing a Canadian service is the right thing, as the law ALLOWS it.

As far as violating user agreement, you can violate all the terms in an agreement between you and me IF I LET YOU!!!

YMMV, but if you're not doing anything wrong, why do you hide your identity?

This kind of logic is really amuse me. Only because I do something wrong that I hide my identity? This is the same kind of logic like "if you are not doing anything illegal why don't you let me search your house without a warrant".

So let me tell you, even if I am not doing anything wrong, I still like to hide my identity. That is a right that the owner of this forum grants, i.e. we don't need to publicize personal info to post in this forum.

But if you must know, I'll let you know. My name is Karl, I live in Sandy, Utah.

Oops, does this forum requires security clearance to post?

If you have no problem violating user agreements, that is your business, but there is no place in this forum for people who knowingly receive service they are not entitled to IMHO.

They are not entitled to? How do you figure?

- Grey market subs have Canadian addresses, that entitles them to receive the service.
- Grey market subs may or may not be in Canada, but the provider does NOT exercise its rights to verify.

So prey tell, they are not entitled to receive the service according to whom?

Karl Foster

10-30-02, 09:43 PM

"They are not entitled to? How do you figure?

- Grey market subs have Canadian addresses, that entitles them to receive the service.
- Grey market subs may or may not be in Canada, but the provider does NOT exercise its rights to verify.

So prey tell, they are not entitled to receive the service according to whom?"

Logic like this makes me laugh as well. Did you not read the user agreement? Whether or not it is enforced is irrelevant. YOU are in violation of the user agreement. I know you will argue with me that becuase you haven't been caught, you're not doing anything wrong. :rolleyes:

BTW, go ahead and give ExpressVu my name and address, I have nothing to hide from them, Directv, Dish Network, etc.

We will just have to agree to disagree. Have a nice evening.

lkw

10-30-02, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by karl_f
"They are not entitled to? How do you figure?

- Grey market subs have Canadian addresses, that entitles them to receive the service.
- Grey market subs may or may not be in Canada, but the provider does NOT exercise its rights to verify.

So prey tell, they are not entitled to receive the service according to whom?"

Logic like this makes me laugh as well. Did you not read the user agreement? Whether or not it is enforced is irrelevant.

Of course that's extremely RELEVANT. That's the WHOLE POINT!!! Grey market subs exist on both sides of the border because the providers do NOT care about that term on the user agreement (regarding location of the IRD). That's the only reason that we have this argument here.

You can read all you want, but if the phone line is not enforced that tells me one BIG thing. The physcial location of the receiver is no concern of the provider, let it be dish, directv or bev.

YOU are in violation of the user agreement.

And that's NOT for you to decide. That's for the other party of the contract to decide. As far as I know, any agreement is only between bev and the subscriber. They didn't pull directv, dish, *C, cable or any posters in this forum as co-signer of the agreement.

I know you will argue with me that becuase you haven't been caught,

or because the other party has no interest to find out.

xxxx

10-31-02, 06:34 AM

The main problem about rights arises as the result of the entertainment industry not keeping up with technology. I'm talking about all aspects from producers, to distributors all the way down to local network affiliates. Each naturally wants to protect his/her own turf.

There are 3 types of programming distribution here. A) Programming that has rights sold by country - Sopranos, all series shown on US networks. B) Programming distributed by the same provider in the US and Canada - eg) A&E, CNN etc. C) Programming which has no distribution in the other country - eg CBC, TVO, TCM etc

Let's take the example of 2 subscribers: Joe in Indianna with DirecTV and Star Choice and Harry outside Calgary with the Echostar twins. To complicate the issue; both have HD

Let's look at (A) geographical rights issues
Joe likes watching Frasier, but his local signal is fuzzy sometimes so he watches on SC, If he watches in non HD, he sees the Global network version - voila his local broadcaster loses a viewer that the affilate has paid the rights for. Joe watches in HD, he sees the WDIV-DT Detroit feed. Once again, local broadcaster loses viewer.

B)Programming distributed by same service US and Canada. A&E is a good example as it is on both Cdn satellite services. A&E doesn't care where you live in North America and where you get your feed - be it cable, DBS or BUD. They get their subscriber fee regardless.

C) Programming with no rights holder in other country. CBC is good example as their only US show is Simpson's reruns. Available from free from C Band until they went digital, one problem here is that programmers ad fees can only be calculated by the number of viewers in their own country. So if one wants CBC programming outside of border areas then Expressvu/SC needed. CBC owns Hockey Night in Canada - so now Center Ice buys the HNIC feed - voila - now there is a US distributor for 5 hours/week of CBC programming. So what's the answer here folks? There is a legitimate US paying distributor for 5 hours/week - is it right/wrong for an American to pay for all CBC programming via satellite because the rights for 5 hours/week have been sold for US broadcast?

Same issue in Canada. Movie Central/TMN buy Canadian rights from HBO for Sopranos. HBO also shows programs that have no Canadian rights holders. Is it right/wrong for Canadians to buy HBO? Supreme Court of Canada says it is illegal for Canadians to receive HBO unless it is delivered by SC/Expressvu, but they know that the law made in preDBS days is outdated. The Supreme Court doesn't want to look biased so they tell defendants to challenge the existing law under the Canadian Charter of Rights legislation.

My point is that the existing system is such a quagmire, due to protectionist attitudes of competing business and interest groups - No government anywhere wants to tackle this mess.

But it up to the producers/distributors to come up with the fair equitable solution - not us the viewers. We just want to be entertained - and we're willing to pay for it.

John Hodgson

10-31-02, 06:52 AM

As John Q Public wrote "No. There are already lots of Canadian DTH forums in existance such as Kusat's www.canadian-tv.com/forums; Virtual Help www.virtualelectronics.com/forum and Digital Home Canada www.digitalhomecanada.com plus a few others. None of them allow talk of security issues.
"

Tim

10-31-02, 06:59 AM

I wonder why your school can't honestly argue against grey market sub without bringing up hacking...

Ikw-
Firstly, I'm not arguing against it. What I have been trying to get across it that there is a reason or two why you can't call and order direct. Pretending those reasons don't exist because one party chooses to "ignore" them doesn't make those reasons go away. Second, I used hacking as an example....

So I'll use this as an example- Again I love a good Cuban cigar...

You say:
I have the rights to buy it, as long as the seller is willing to sell it and the transaction is legal

If I can find a guy down the street selling Cubans and I buy them is that a legal transaction? He's willing to sell & I'm willing to buy.

I drive 70 in a 55 all the time. If there is nobody on the road this is a "victimless" crime correct? I'm sure i'd still get a ticket if I get caught.

Lastly I do not:
think Directv/dish forms a totalitarian government that
"if you don't watch TV (American contents) from us then you can't watch TV, Canadian (French) content is outlawed here", then you have a bigger problem than I thought.

But I do see both sides of the argument. It doesn't mean I agree with them though :)

My kids love Treehouse TV on Bev. I'd say it's on more than the Disney Channel. I agree with you that the "Free Market" should let us watch Treehouse. Disney doesn't- and that point is all I am trying to make you see.

James_F

10-31-02, 07:02 AM

Originally posted by lkw

or because the other party has no interest to find out.

How can you be that myopic? I get away with murder, but since I'm not caught its OK? :rolleyes:

dlsnyder

10-31-02, 07:59 AM

I voted NO. This thread is ample proof of what such a forum would become.

Chris Blount

10-31-02, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by dlsnyder
I voted NO. This thread is ample proof of what such a forum would become. You beat me to the punch. It's obviously a controversial issue and quite frankly will not be worth the time to moderate. There are plenty of other places to discuss Canadian DBS. The poll is closed.

Thank you all for your thoughtful input.

Snoman

10-31-02, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by Chris Blount
It's obviously a controversial issue and quite frankly will not be worth the time to moderate. The poll is closed.

Thank you all for your thoughtful input.

This thread will give you a feel for some of the threads at www.canadian-tv.com/forums. Many of the Expressvu subs there are .. well I guess the polite phrase would be, not very open minded.

Scott Greczkowski

10-31-02, 10:27 AM

I haven't chimed in yet, so here goes.

DBSTalk.COM is first and foremost an American DBS forum. Being an American DBS forum is what we do and know best. I would like to keep it that way.

With that being said if you search around here at DBSTalk.COM you will see that there has been good open discussion about Canadian DBS, we are always happy to help out any DBS subscriber no matter which service they have or where they live. Because of the amount of traffic we have had so far with Canadian DBS questions I feel there is no need for a seperated Canadian DBS area.

There have been some very vocal opinions here on if subscribing to Canadian DBS is right or wrong, I am not going to take sides on this but I respect each party who has stated their opinion on the subject. As you can see there should be some kind of rules in place on subscribing to out the country DBS providers. Personally I think the borders should be opened and people should be able to choose the provider they think is best for them.

I thank everyone for their input on this subject!

lkw

10-31-02, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by James_F

How can you be that myopic? I get away with murder, but since I'm not caught its OK? :rolleyes:

This is really funny. When everything fails, always use murder to equate to subbing grey market.

Tell me this: who's doing the catching in subbing grey market?
Don't forget, it's a ***LEGAL*** activity.

lkw

10-31-02, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by Tim

Ikw-
Firstly, I'm not arguing against it. What I have been trying to get across it that there is a reason or two why you can't call and order direct.

As something else said, this is merely a nuisance to sub grey market. This has nothing to do with the legality, or even ethics.

If all you can tell me is that I have to go thru' 3 extra steps to achieve the goal, then you are not telling me anything wrong.

You say:

I have the rights to buy it, as long as the seller is willing to sell it and the transaction is legal

If I can find a guy down the street selling Cubans and I buy them is that a legal transaction? He's willing to sell & I'm willing to buy.

See how convenient for you to left out the 2nd conjunct of my quallification?

"and the transaction is legal"

Why only use Cuban cigar? why not use cocaine or pirated software, clearly illegal products, as examples? A is willing to sell cocaine/pirated software, does B have the right to buy? Why or why not?

And the difference between buying cocaine/pirated software vs buying a foreign satellite service is left as an exercise...

Tim

10-31-02, 01:21 PM

I used the Cuban Cigar (insert joke here :) ) and not cocaine because, as dumb as you apparentley think I am, I KNOW cocaine is illegal.

However the cigar- would you agree I am not SUPPOSED to have that cigar in my posession? Even though I'm able to buy it and somebody is willing to sell it to me? Victimless crime right?

You know and I know that if I plug my phone line in on my BEV3100 that eventually they will shut me off. I'll ask you this question- why will they shut me off?

I'll agree to disagree with you on this. Thanks to the board's admin for not locking the thread.

James_F

10-31-02, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by lkw

This is really funny. When everything fails, always use murder to equate to subbing grey market.

OK so how about shoplifting? :rolleyes:

James_F

10-31-02, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by lkw

this is merely a nuisance to sub grey market.

Way to explain it away. :sleeping:

lkw

10-31-02, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by James_F

OK so how about shoplifting? :rolleyes:

How about legally buying some legal merchandise?

lkw

10-31-02, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by Tim
I used the Cuban Cigar (insert joke here :) ) and not cocaine because, as dumb as you apparentley think I am, I KNOW cocaine is illegal.

However the cigar- would you agree I am not SUPPOSED to have that cigar in my posession?

I can't answer you, because I don't know whether Cuban cigar is a legal product to purchase in this country or not. That's why cocaine is a clearer example.

Even though I'm able to buy it and somebody is willing to sell it to me? Victimless crime right?

I don't know. I'll tell you if I know whether it's a crime. I know for sure subbing foreign service is NOT a crime.

Since it's not a crime, how can it be a victim/victimless crime?

You know and I know that if I plug my phone line in on my BEV3100 that eventually they will shut me off. I'll ask you this question- why will they shut me off?

BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR BUSINESS PRACTICE!!! It's not a legal
issue. Every business has its rights to sell or not to sell to certain customers. Ever seen the sign

"we reserve the rights to decline your business"

in restaurants?

James_F

10-31-02, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by lkw

How about legally buying some legal merchandise?

But you don't have permission from the store.

James_F

10-31-02, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by lkw
BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR BUSINESS PRACTICE!!! It's not a legal
issue. Every business has its rights to sell or not to sell to certain customers. Ever seen the sign

"we reserve the rights to decline your business"

in restaurants?

You gotta be kidding me? No sell to the largest market in the world? If they though they could they would, don't kid youself for a second that they aren't selling service to the US because its a "business decision". :bang:

lkw

10-31-02, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by James_F

But you don't have permission from the store.

Sure do. That's how we are able to buy grey market.

So what's your beef now?

- legality? it's legal
- permission from the store? it's permitted, as long as the sub has a Canadian address.

So what's next?

lkw

10-31-02, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by James_F

You gotta be kidding me? No sell to the largest market in the world?

Why are you surprised? Every enterprise has a right to make that decision.

If they though they could they would, don't kid youself for a second that they aren't selling service to the US because its a "business decision". :bang:

They cannot KNOWINGLY sell to the U.S. We have covered that 10 thousands times. How many more times do you want to hear that?

They don't want to sell to the U.S. not because of some law saying that it's a crime, but the threat of potential ***CIVIL*** suits from the American right holders. Do you know criminal cases is different from civil cases?

However, that's a totally different issue from whether I can buy this product using a Canadian address. Legally, you have no beef to complain because my purchase is legal.