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
- - - - -

Distants question


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
33 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Link

Link

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,744 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2004

Posted 02 January 2005 - 03:37 PM

If the new laws have changed and won't allow those with waivers or those who qualify to have distants in addition to local channels, what areas besides those that E* and Directv don't have locals in yet will be allowed to get them??

I know some addresses qualified for both locals and distants before, so will those customers get to keep them if they had both, but in the future no others will?

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#2 OFFLINE   ADent

ADent

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 86 posts
Joined: Jul 07, 2002

Posted 03 January 2005 - 03:06 PM

If the new laws have changed and won't allow those with waivers or those who qualify to have distants in addition to local channels, what areas besides those that E* and Directv don't have locals in yet will be allowed to get them??

I know some addresses qualified for both locals and distants before, so will those customers get to keep them if they had both, but in the future no others will?



I have not studied it, but reports say that no one can get OOM Networks if locals are available. If no locals are available and you don't get the networks OTA Grade B, then you can get OOM Networks.

A few people that have both (from 1999 or before?) can continue, but most will have to choose which to lose.

#3 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,295 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 03 January 2005 - 03:46 PM

I know some addresses qualified for both locals and distants before, so will those customers get to keep them if they had both, but in the future no others will?

If a customer had both on January 1st they will be getting a letter asking them if they want to keep distants. If they fail to respond to the letter - bye bye distants!

Satellite providers DO NOT have to continue to offer distants, even in to customers that legally can get them. It is a permission not requirement.

JL

#4 OFFLINE   Link

Link

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 1,744 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 03:54 PM

If a customer had both on January 1st they will be getting a letter asking them if they want to keep distants. If they fail to respond to the letter - bye bye distants!

Satellite providers DO NOT have to continue to offer distants, even in to customers that legally can get them. It is a permission not requirement.

JL


I guess that means no more west coast options for some people. Now if a subscriber was paying for 2 distant cities-New York and LA for instance--can they keep both cities or just one set of distants? Most Directv subs, have both.

#5 OFFLINE   waltinvt

waltinvt

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 368 posts
Joined: Feb 09, 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 04:30 PM

As the smoke clears on this new legislation is anyone else starting to feel like they've been had ?

I wish someone could explain to me something positive about the new law for those of us that really don't have any digital options.

#6 OFFLINE   pomeroy

pomeroy

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 106 posts
Joined: Jan 02, 2005

Posted 03 January 2005 - 05:36 PM

Fear not, Talking to the right Directv person can get you what you want. I have been a Directv customer from day 1 and have had the distant networks. Up untill they passed that law were you had to get a wavier, "I think the law about this is a joke if people want the get distant networks and pay for them they should be able to get them and sign a paper telling your local channels to get lost" Back to my story, I was able to get waviers from all of my local channels even though I could receive there channel with rabbit ears :lol: Pretty soon Directv had my locals available, I was really worried about losing my distant networks, So I decided which one I watched the most and and dropped the others because I figured they would not come down on me to bad for just having 1 distant network. Anyway Directv has had my locals for several years now and I still have my distant network channel I wanted to keep, a fews times when I called them to upgrade my package they were looking over my account and said we have locals available to you now do you want them? I said no, that was it plus being a Directv customer for 10 years helps alot. But the key is talking to the right Directv person, and believe it or not it was a female that helped me keep my distant network ;) you can tell in there voice whether or not to hang up :lol: Becareful though because one time I called and never gave my name or account number talking to them and they knew who I was :eek2:

#7 OFFLINE   Lord Vader

Lord Vader

    Special Member

  • Registered
  • 8,356 posts
  • LocationGalactic Empire
Joined: Sep 20, 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 05:45 PM

Pomeroy, you didn't even have to drop your other DNS channels. I don't know why you did. I've had all the 380's for years and don't plan on touching them. I'm leaving well enough alone, including all 4 networks' HD feeds, both east and west. :)

#8 OFFLINE   Lord Vader

Lord Vader

    Special Member

  • Registered
  • 8,356 posts
  • LocationGalactic Empire
Joined: Sep 20, 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 05:46 PM

If a customer had both on January 1st they will be getting a letter asking them if they want to keep distants. If they fail to respond to the letter - bye bye distants!

Satellite providers DO NOT have to continue to offer distants, even in to customers that legally can get them. It is a permission not requirement.

JL

Letter? Says who? DirecTV is supposed to be grandfathering those who had the DNS before January 1. Why would they waste time and money sending out millions of letters? :nono2:

You have such little faith.

#9 OFFLINE   pomeroy

pomeroy

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 106 posts
Joined: Jan 02, 2005

Posted 03 January 2005 - 06:02 PM

Pomeroy, you didn't even have to drop your other DNS channels. I don't know why you did. I've had all the 380's for years and don't plan on touching them. I'm leaving well enough alone, including all 4 networks' HD feeds, both east and west. :)


I guess I just freaked out over getting those letters in the mail from Directv saying there were going to take them away, Turns out those were computer generated and sent out to everybody :rolleyes: Beside I am lucky to have my KNBC Los Angeles I could not see not having it, I love that channel, I live on the east coast But am on west coast time :) I did not really watch the other distant networks as much. I don't know of many people that have locals available from Directv and can still get distant networks. Directv has been real good to me :sure:

#10 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,295 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 03 January 2005 - 06:21 PM

Letter? Says who?

Says the Congress of the United States and the President when he signed it into law. I think that trumps. :D

JL

#11 OFFLINE   Lord Vader

Lord Vader

    Special Member

  • Registered
  • 8,356 posts
  • LocationGalactic Empire
Joined: Sep 20, 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 10:50 PM

Except that the law never stipulated letters were to be sent out to customers. Nice try, justa, but no cigar for you.

#12 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,295 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 12:49 AM

Except that the law never stipulated letters were to be sent out to customers. Nice try, justa, but no cigar for you.

47 USC 338 (h) as created by SHVERA
(h) ADDITIONAL NOTICES TO SUBSCRIBERS, NETWORKS, AND STATIONS CONCERNING SIGNAL CARRIAGE.—

(1) NOTICES TO AND ELECTIONS BY SUBSCRIBERS CONCERNING GRANDFATHERED SIGNALS.—
Any carrier that provides a distant signal of a network station to a subscriber pursuant section 339(a)(2)(A) shall

(A) within 60 days after the local signal of a network station of the same television network is available pursuant to section 338, or within 60 days after the date of enactment of the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004, whichever is later, send a notice to the subscriber

(i) offering to substitute the local network signal for the duplicating distant network signal; and
(ii) informing the subscriber that, if the subscriber fails to respond in 60 days, the subscriber will lose the distant network signal but will be permitted to subscribe to the local network signal; and

(B) if the subscriber

(i) elects to substitute such local network signal within such 60 days, switch such subscriber to such local network signal within 10 days after the end of such 60-day period; or
(ii) fails to respond within such 60 days, terminate the distant network signal within 10 days after the end of such 60-day period.



Perhaps now would be a good time to apologize, Lord Vader? :D

JL

#13 OFFLINE   Bobby94928

Bobby94928

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 993 posts
Joined: May 12, 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 09:40 AM

Give that man a seegar!!!
Bobby C

#14 OFFLINE   joblo

joblo

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 484 posts
Joined: Dec 10, 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 11:29 PM

pursuant section 339(a)(2)(A)

339(a)(2)(A) refers to 1998/99 grade B grandfathered subs.

No letters/choices required for white area subs.

#15 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,295 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 05 January 2005 - 09:05 AM

339(a)(2)(A) refers to 1998/99 grade B grandfathered subs.

No letters/choices required for white area subs.

Try again. The law applies to any sub in a DMA that has their own locals now, and continues to apply to subscribers as new DMAs get locals. Even those in white areas.

JL

#16 OFFLINE   joblo

joblo

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 484 posts
Joined: Dec 10, 2003

Posted 05 January 2005 - 04:48 PM

Try again. The law applies to any sub in a DMA that has their own locals now


The law in its entirety, sure, but the section you posted does not. That section applies to grandfathered -- i.e. grade B -- subs only.

#17 OFFLINE   BabaLouie

BabaLouie

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 79 posts
Joined: Apr 02, 2004

Posted 05 January 2005 - 05:39 PM

Oh, great...do I need to hire a lawyer to tell me what this law really means? :lol:

#18 OFFLINE   Link

Link

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 1,744 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2004

Posted 05 January 2005 - 05:55 PM

Try again. The law applies to any sub in a DMA that has their own locals now, and continues to apply to subscribers as new DMAs get locals. Even those in white areas.

JL


Isn't every location in the country in one DMA or another? White areas were a part of DMAs, just far enough away from the local station Grade B signals to justify getting a distant signal. Am I correct?

#19 OFFLINE   jdspencer

jdspencer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,585 posts
Joined: Nov 07, 2003

Posted 05 January 2005 - 05:59 PM

I currently get DNS for all four major networks and the HD equivalents from DirecTV. So when the locals become available for my DMA (154) I'll have to make a choice between them or keep the DNS. Right? What happens if one of the networks isn't available locally? Can I keep that one DNS? What happens with the HD feeds if DirecTV doesn't get my HD locals. For me the selection will be easy. I'll keep the DNS. At least until they change the rules again. :)
DirecTV since '96, Waivers for ABC, CBS, NBC, & Fox, HR23-700 & HR24-500/AM21, using ethernet based MRV.

#20 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,295 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 05 January 2005 - 10:17 PM

The law in its entirety, sure,

And that is what matters. I could post the whole section of USC but as long as you and I agree that it says what I said it said it's just a waste of typing.

Isn't every location in the country in one DMA or another? White areas were a part of DMAs, just far enough away from the local station Grade B signals to justify getting a distant signal. Am I correct?

Most everywhere in the country is in a DMA (the exception being portions of Alaska). White areas are geographical points outside the Grade B of ALL stations of a particular network, regardless of if they are in the customer's DMA or not. What has changed is that White Area residents in DMAs where their locals are offered will not be able to get distants in the future (their only option is their own DMA's locals). White Area residents in DMAs where locals are not offered CAN, for the time being, get distants. But they lose distants if they subscribe to locals when they do become available. The goal of SHVERA is that no customer in a DMA with locals offered can continue to get distants.

JL




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