Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Kind of odd moving quesiton


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   jgmiller31

jgmiller31

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 33 posts
Joined: Jun 14, 2009

Posted 03 December 2012 - 10:52 PM

We're going to be moving and I've already got DirecTV scheduled to come out and do the new install. We're going to be doing kind of a slow move over a couple of weeks so I got a thought into my head. My current setup is 3 DVRs + 2 receivers. I could let them install in the new location then move a receiver or DVR or two back to the old location so I would have service in both locations while the move is going on.

I know DirecTV would say this isn't possible or allowed but that doesn't mean it can't be done. Is there any reason this wouldn't work?

Thanks

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#2 OFFLINE   FlyingDiver

FlyingDiver

    All Star/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 193 posts
  • LocationOn the road in North America...
Joined: Dec 03, 2002

Posted 03 December 2012 - 10:57 PM

Unless the locations are far enough apart that you'll loose the old locals, it should be fine.

#3 OFFLINE   i3rown

i3rown

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 58 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2011

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:04 PM

Your fine if they aren't active at the same time .. But take them all if your going to move them all or your gonna have to do an upgrade when you finally move for the last time.

#4 OFFLINE   jgmiller31

jgmiller31

    Mentor

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 33 posts
Joined: Jun 14, 2009

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:11 PM

No locations are only 12 miles apart, I'm just trying to avoid being without service in one location while we're doing the move. It just makes life simpler with all family members and of course once we complete the move none of the boxes will be at the old location.

#5 OFFLINE   i3rown

i3rown

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 58 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2011

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:15 PM

No locations are only 12 miles apart, I'm just trying to avoid being without service in one location while we're doing the move. It just makes life simpler with all family members and of course once we complete the move none of the boxes will be at the old location.


Yup... Do your movers .. Take all your receivers .. When you go back take em back with you .. If they are being used at both locations at the same time and you have a moral compass it's signal theft

#6 OFFLINE   HarleyD

HarleyD

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,275 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2006

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:13 AM

I don't even think it's a morality issue. You can't watch in both places at once and you aren't increasing the number of total receivers. It's not like you're sub-letting your account to a second residence. It's an either/or proposition. Either watch it here or watch it there while you are transitioning. It's definitely within the spirit of the agreement.

But from a pure technology standpoint if the DVR/Receiver is activated it won't care where it is physically located as long as you feed it a good satellite signal.
"Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible."
--Frank Zappa

#7 OFFLINE   i3rown

i3rown

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 58 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2011

Posted 04 December 2012 - 05:28 PM

I don't even think it's a morality issue. You can't watch in both places at once and you aren't increasing the number of total receivers. It's not like you're sub-letting your account to a second residence. It's an either/or proposition. Either watch it here or watch it there while you are transitioning. It's definitely within the spirit of the agreement.

But from a pure technology standpoint if the DVR/Receiver is activated it won't care where it is physically located as long as you feed it a good satellite signal.


I'm not talking about a specific person watching them in both places at the same time with us obviously impossible , I'm talking about both locations viewing programming by whoever 2 people or more at different addresses .. Period it's wrong not negotiable.

Ethically it's wrong legally it's wrong , physically it's possible. I don't care what happens I'm just saying if the op wants to know how to do it right . What I posted is how to do it right .

#8 OFFLINE   Brubear

Brubear

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 151 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2008

Posted 04 December 2012 - 05:39 PM

if the new place has a swim and the old a multiswitch it's going to be a pain. Legally I believe that both locations can't be active simultaneously but that is a function of locals availability, which is most of the crux regarding satellite legislation anyway. That would be the reason that a additional ird in an RV is ok, since they pretty much don't have locals by definition.

my comments and opinions are my own and do not suggest endorsement by my employer


#9 OFFLINE   jgmiller31

jgmiller31

    Mentor

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 33 posts
Joined: Jun 14, 2009

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:32 PM

Current locaiton is on a SWM so shouldn't be an issue. Regarding the ethical nature of all of this I would submit this to you. If I have 5 receivers (I do) in 5 rooms (I do) and I suddenly build a guest house (I didn't) with 2 rooms and I take 2 of the 5 receivers and put them in the guest house I'm not doing anything ethically, morally or legally wrong. Now take that same logic and extend it to a house 12 miles away, I'm not illegally increasing the number of the receivers. Is it possible that someone could be watching in house A and house B at the same time? Yes it's possible, not likely but possible.

I agree this is probably against the DirecTV TOC which would make it a civil violation, but that doesn't make it unethical or immoral.

#10 OFFLINE   i3rown

i3rown

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 58 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2011

Posted 05 December 2012 - 12:04 AM

I'll say this .. I go to sketchy jobs all the time .. 16 receivers on an account ., 1 box movers ..

It's not my business what you do.. Just don't be a dick to me ... And don't tell me anything I don't want to hear ..

#11 OFFLINE   HarleyD

HarleyD

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,275 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2006

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:16 AM

I'm not talking about a specific person watching them in both places at the same time with us obviously impossible , I'm talking about both locations viewing programming by whoever 2 people or more at different addresses .. Period it's wrong not negotiable.

Ethically it's wrong legally it's wrong , physically it's possible. I don't care what happens I'm just saying if the op wants to know how to do it right . What I posted is how to do it right .


He's maintaining the family's ability to watch TV simultaneously in different rooms, the same as he currently enjoys. He's not providing programming to additional people. He is not expanding the actual consumption of the product beyond what he currently receives.

It's not significantly different than the kids being in a bedroom and watching. The bedroom is just 12 miles away. As a transitional stopgap I don't share your moral outrage. He's not cheating DirecTV out of anything.
"Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible."
--Frank Zappa

#12 OFFLINE   TMan

TMan

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 209 posts
Joined: Oct 30, 2007

Posted 05 December 2012 - 11:28 AM

He's maintaining the family's ability to watch TV simultaneously in different rooms, the same as he currently enjoys. He's not providing programming to additional people. He is not expanding the actual consumption of the product beyond what he currently receives.

It's not significantly different than the kids being in a bedroom and watching. The bedroom is just 12 miles away. As a transitional stopgap I don't share your moral outrage. He's not cheating DirecTV out of anything.


Exactly. He's not trying to finagle service at a vacation home or fishing cabin for an indefinite period of time, used concurrently with service at the primary residence. He just has two houses for a brief, finite time.

Surely we don't expect the OP to establish a new, additional account for service intended to be used for only 14 days or so. (One could argue that he simply let the service move when the installer installs it at the new place, but then we wouldn't have our little scenario to discuss here.:D)

As for the guest house scenario someone mentioned earlier...how would that work? I'm talking about a separate structure on the same property as a customer's main home. Does that require separate service with its own full monthly bill?

A relative of mine has a swimming pool at her home. The previous owner built a "pool house" next to it that is, as I understand it, roughly the size of a small single-car garage. It is set up like a small apartment, with a sitting area, bathroom, and kitchenette. I don't think there is a bedroom, but it has a sofa sleeper, and they have had guests use it overnight. It is finished, air-conditioned space. Would D* take issue with a receiver placed in that building, claiming it isn't the same as having a receiver in another room in the main house?
October 2012 DirecTV subscriber - HR34(Genie)/C31/C31 - AU9-S-SWM Five LNB - Premier

#13 OFFLINE   Ken Stomski

Ken Stomski

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 81 posts
Joined: Nov 17, 2011

Posted 05 December 2012 - 12:49 PM

pool house is on same electric meter? if so, only one account is needed. if you happen to RENT OUT the pool house then you probably have more potential problems than directv :)

#14 OFFLINE   trh

trh

    This Space for Sale

  • Registered
  • 3,390 posts
  • LocationNE FL
Joined: Nov 02, 2007

Posted 05 December 2012 - 04:11 PM

I agree this is probably against the DirecTV TOC which would make it a civil violation, but that doesn't make it unethical or immoral.

Wow.

#15 OFFLINE   jgmiller31

jgmiller31

    Mentor

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 33 posts
Joined: Jun 14, 2009

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:43 PM

Wow.


I didn't mean to imply that it is moral and ethical to violate any portion of a TOC anytime you feel like. There are however clauses in contracts that every one of us sign that we violate because the clause was put in because by a lawyer that had way too much time on his hands. For instance, at one time AT&T DSL service had in it's TOC that you were not allowed to hang a wireless access point on your service. I would guess that maybe 95% of the people that signed that TOC violated it, does it make their violation immoral and unethical?




Protected By... spam firewall...And...