1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Crap, they got me!

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by C*Tedesco, May 30, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    0
    Apr 14, 2002
    Kind of like winning the lottery eh?
     
  2. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,116
    1,066
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The odds are better that E* will mess up and give you free channels. :D

    JL
     
  3. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    0
    Apr 14, 2002
    Your probably right but I have a feeling that those odds will be signifigantly less after this card swap is said and done.
     
  4. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,623
    385
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    So... if someone breaks into your house and leaves you some money... then you are a thief?

    This is a closer analogy to the situation where someone orders a receiver, and is shipped one that is programmed for more channels than they asked for...
     
  5. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,116
    1,066
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    They BROKE in to my house. The money is compensation for whatever they broke to get in. :D

    But if someone accidentally/incidentally gives me something that that they didn't intend (or were not permitted by the 'owner') to give me I'll try to set the record straight. You may choose differently. It IS America, after all. :D
    No. Money is tangible. Money is an object that cannot be shared. It can be taken, given and divided but no two people can have the same dollar. Satellite service is intangible ... many people can share the same signal. One subscriber does not have to 'give up' a channel for another to get it.

    There have been a lot of tangible examples in this thread, so I won't scold you for laying another one on the table. :D

    JL
     
  6. GutBomb

    GutBomb Godfather

    332
    0
    Jun 17, 2004
    if it's a physical object somebody leaves at my house of course i am not going to keep it. but if the cable/satellite companies give me channels i did not subscribe to because of some error or glitch on their part i am going to keep them. it's not like if i watch that channel some legitimate subscriber can't, so i keep it. but then again i am not religious and don't believe i am going to be judged after i die, so when free stuff is given to me (however inadvertent) i take it.

    that being said, comcast came by to hook me up with cable a few weeks ago (cancelled dish - something for another thread) and on 3 of the 4 tvs they hooked up they had the package right, but on the main tv i had all the premium channels, all the regular channels, and all the spanish channels. the one thing i was missing is the sports teir (which contains fox soccer channel and goltv... 2 channels i absolutely NEED on the main TV) so i called to see if they could hit my box so it would give me the channel.s i subscribe to. unfortunately i lost all those extra channels and now i only have the channels i was intended to receive in the first place.
     
  7. DonLandis

    DonLandis Hall Of Fame

    3,363
    0
    Dec 17, 2003
    I think many of you are being too anal about it. Trust me, you don't need to define morality for the cable companies. They know very well that the cable modems are frequencied in the center of the analog cable channels and when they do the install, they do have a choice to filter some, not all of those channels out. Locally, years ago, before I did work for Comcast and also became a program provider for cable, I had their first cable modems. I was told to connect the cable also to a TV and use it as I want that it came with that service since they couldn't actually filter it all out. They even installed an RFI filter in the junction box to isolate the cable going to the TV and preventing interference from affecting the cable modem which was a problem back then. I was also told by the installer that they will use this TV connection to do trouble shooting, so keep it hooked up. Yes, they often asked when I had modem trouble to check the signal on a TV set. Was there an additional charge on my bill? No. Did I ever feel I was stealing programming because it didn't appear as a line item on my bill? No. Was I afraid to discuss the connection with the Cable company? No. Later, I began to do independent work for Cable and as a perk they "gave" me expanded channels that were originally filtered from that modem connection. I still don't get the premiums but the basic stuff is all there. We use it on our Kitchen TV. I once tried to get it changed to a digital but their CSR who handles "VIP" accounts ( I was told that my account is listed as that) was new and could'd figure out how to set that up in the billing. It became too complicated so I gave up on it and decided to just continue to have analog for now. Anyway, the point is that if you have a signal that rides into your home along with your internet service, trust me, Cable knows it. Go ahead and enjoy it as it is really a part of your service. If you have the premiums turned on then something is wrong and you may have a tough time explaining that you didn't do anything wrong because the notch filters are missing. Better call them and set the record straight. As for morality goes, consider this- You are wrong if you feel you can't call them on the phone and talk to them about it. Some around here use the term WWJD? Maybe you can use that as your guide. :)

    Now for a real twist to this thread- When I got the perk, I wasn't actually notified about it by my rep. Instead I continued to pay a cable bill. That bill added up over a year before they sent me a statement. Now, I have about $184 in credit!!!! Problem is I can't get them to credit my account or return the money. They admit owing it to me but it's like talking to a black hole when getting them to issue me a refund. I've been waiting for over 2 years now and all I get is a statement each month showing the credit. Go figure!

    Yes, I realize my situation is a bit unique being a provider to cable but the point is, they know the modem users have basic analog TV and you all are just worrying over nothing! Enjoy.
     
  8. CrankyYankee

    CrankyYankee Mentor

    39
    0
    Feb 19, 2003
    I used to work in direct sales for TWC and it was my job to go out to addresses that used to have cable and for whatever reason dropped it(got a dish...got an antenna...owed us money...whatever)
    The job had a kind of side job of discovering cable theft in one form or another.
    I went to one woman's address and she flat out told me, "I've been wondering when you were going to show up". The address had been active with the former renter, she moved in and discovered the cable was still on. Three years later, I show up and we came to a businesslike agreement, no charge for the 3 years of our goof, no install charge(since it's on already) and she just started paying regular monthly service charges from the date this was discovered.

    Another address concerned a situation in a MDU(multi-dwelling unit) where 98% had cable and this guy did not.

    I talked with him about deals and made him offers and he politely refused.
    I went back again a few weeks later and just as I'm ready to ring the doorbell, I can see thru an open window a program on his TV that I knew was on at the time I was at the front door!

    Well, a little checking by the tech found he had spliced into the nextdoors cable with a splitter in the attic and was watching cable for a couple of years free.

    One of our big burly techs went out to talk with him since he refused the offers I had made.

    Then, once in a while, we'd find we had been charging customers for service they were not using, as in a lady who dutifully paid the bill each month, even though she did not have a "box" and was being charged for HBO. We credited the money she had been paying for HBO onto her nominal bill.

    Some people had dropped off just to give the finger to the cable company, but I was able to sign up a lot of them with the local "basic" channels years before those channels were offered on satellite.


    Sure, stuff happens, and everybody makes mistakes. But through audits, direct sales and
    plain old luck, cable thieves are found, and our office did bring folks to court if something
    could not be worked out to sign them up as a regular customer.

    (One more story) A whole apartment building once cancelled cable. We found a dish on the front lawn(PrimeStar).
    What I found was the landlord had three boxes on his account and was running lines into each of his apartments and charging the renters for the "service". (How did I know, he told me!)
    Nothing we could do about that, right? (heh-heh-heh...)
     
  9. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,116
    1,066
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    There are commercial offerings where a landlord can LEGALLY subscribe to packages at a per unit price - but I too doubt that is what the landlord in your post was doing.

    JL
     
  10. cboylan3

    cboylan3 Godfather

    274
    0
    Jan 26, 2004

    you sure about that? D* believes it is tangible. (or atleast they did for the 1st 2 years of their extortion campaign.) They sued people for "conversion".

    This may help the current conversation

    From the lectric law library:

    CONVERSION - Torts. The unlawful turning or applying the personal goods of another to the use of the taker, or of some other person than the owner; or the unlawful destroying or altering their nature.

    When a party takes away or wrongfully assumes the right to goods which belong to another, it will in general be sufficient evidence of a conversion but when the original taking was lawful, as when the party found the goods, and the detention only is illegal, it is absolutely necessary to make a demand of the goods, and there must be a refusal to deliver them before the conversion will be complete. The refusal by a servant to deliver the goods entrusted to him by his master is not evidence of a conversion by his master.

    The tortious taking of property is, of itself, a conversion and any intermeddling with it, or any exercise of dominion over it, subversive of the dominion of the owner or the nature of the bailment if it be bailed, is evidence of a conversion.

    In Equity. The considering of one thing as changed into another; for example, land will be considered as converted into money and treated as such by a court of equity, when the owner has contracted to sell his estate, in which case, if he die before the conveyance, his executors and not his heirs will be entitled to the money. On the other hand, money is converted into land in a variety of ways as for example, when a man agrees to buy land and dies before he has received the conveyance, the money he was to pay for it will be considered as converted into lands, and descend to the heir.
     
  11. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,116
    1,066
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Go ahead. TRY to give back the DBS service you watched last month. :)

    Since one cannot return the intangible availability of the service for viewing it has to be converted into something tangible. Money works nicely for this purpose as DBS providers have already set a tangible price on receiving the intangible service. In addition, federal law defines a tangible money price for theft of DBS service.

    The intangible service became tangible money - that is what rightfully SHOULD have gone to D* for the viewing of their service and that (plus the legally defined penalty) is what D* sued for.

    JL
     
  12. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,623
    385
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I can tell you that if the cable people gave me service that I didn't want or didn't order... and they came to my door and tried to strongarm me with threats of charging retroactively for service I never wanted and didn't try to get... they would have a tough time getting any money out of me AND would end up paying for my court costs in the process.

    IF I didn't hook it up or hack my box, and it is their mistake for programming it wrong... it is their problem to find and correct. If they find it, they can correct it by disconnecting the extra services... but they won't get a dime from me for something I didn't ask for.

    This kind of thing smacks of scams that people will pull by doing work for you unasked, then threatening you if you don't pay them... like someone who comes by your house while you are at work and mows your yard or treats it with weed-killer or something and leaves you a bill as if you asked for the service... Not cool.
     
  13. cboylan3

    cboylan3 Godfather

    274
    0
    Jan 26, 2004

    Your logic sounds so nice and neat, however it is incorrect. Please reread the definition of "Conversion". It took D* 2 years to figure out they were wrong about "Conversion". Of course, it took the courts 2 years of telling them they were wrong before they realized it. Yet they occassionally add it in hopes it will slide by the court & dft.

    I think this paragraph may answer the questions of those who were asking in regards to "tangible" examples:

    When a party takes away or wrongfully assumes the right to goods which belong to another, it will in general be sufficient evidence of a conversion but when the original taking was lawful, as when the party found the goods, and the detention only is illegal, it is absolutely necessary to make a demand of the goods, and there must be a refusal to deliver them before the conversion will be complete.
     
  14. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,116
    1,066
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The question was why D* believes it is tangible. Are you saying that the courts are saying D* is wrong? What is the point of bringing up D* if they are wrong? Trolling?
    As I said in my last post ... try to give back the DBS service you watched last month. It is not tangible. The only tangible part left is the MONEY that (hopefully) exchanged hands that allows you to legally watch that service.

    BTW: You would find many in this group that would question if the detention of the goods (satellite service not ordered) is illegal. So even if we assume (as D* did) that conversion applied all the 'ifs' are not satisfied.

    JL
     
  15. cboylan3

    cboylan3 Godfather

    274
    0
    Jan 26, 2004
    ah the trolling quote.....always an easy way out.

    The point is quite simple, you believe that the signal is an intangible,as well as I and I think almost everyone in this thread. However, D*doesn't and has sued and does continue to sue people using the "Conversion" law.

    So this leads me to believe that if you were to receive channels that you did not ask for,and obviously not pay for since you didn't ask for them. (like the question in the 1st post). You are ok and the courts will back you up.

    The bad new is that even if you are ok, you could be out the time and money of a lawsuit.


    I never said I disagreed with you, only that D* does.

    again this may answer the questions to the ones using "tangible" examples (i.e. mail, money, etc.....)

    when the original taking was lawful, as when the party found the goods, and the detention only is illegal, it is absolutely necessary to make a demand of the goods, and there must be a refusal to deliver them before the conversion will be complete.
     
  16. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,116
    1,066
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Perhaps one day you will learn that when you agree with someone you should say so, and not JUST post information that is contrary to what has been said and what you agree with. Otherwise it is just a waste of time.

    The question (if you are applying the conversion rules, which you appear to continue to wish to do regardless of your opinion of it's validity) comes down to whether 'detaining' the channels is illegal. Viewing remains intangible with money being the customary tangible reward to the DBS company for allowing the viewing. The DBS provider COULD demand payment if they found that you were watching channels you were not paying for. They probably won't unless your actions in some way caused the unauthorized viewing (hacking).

    JL
     
  17. cboylan3

    cboylan3 Godfather

    274
    0
    Jan 26, 2004
    JL - man we are just going round and round here. somehow we are just not seeing on the same level. (and thats ok, that happens at times)

    For the examples in this thread of receiving something in the mail that you didn't order or getting extra change back from the store...

    Receiving the item or extra change is not illegal. However, IF the merchant or cashier asks for the goods back AND you refuse, then conversion can be applied and you have a legal issue to deal with. Or if the the merchant asks for the goods back, you do so and every one goes there seperate ways.
    Thats my simple reading of the law. (i'm not going anywhere near the moral issue :lol: )

    As for the example of ordering the basic satellite package and they give you a higher package than what you ordered...in no shape, way, or form can conversion be applied.

    The difference is quite simple. In the 1st example (using tangible goods) you have taken possession of those goods / detained / prevented intended recipient from possesion. In the 2nd example (satellite package/intangible), you have not taken possesion of / detained / prevented intended recipeint from possession.

    Yes, there are laws for "unauthorized viewing", however by them giving you the additional package they are in essence authorizing you to view it. From my readings I dont see how they would be able to successfully claim "unauthorized viewing" in the 2nd example.
     
  18. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    0
    Apr 14, 2002
    Look at both point of views. Yes you didnt go out there and steal the service but is it just as bad to not keep it? Is that like finding something laying on the street and not taking it to the lost and found?
     
  19. cboylan3

    cboylan3 Godfather

    274
    0
    Jan 26, 2004
    I haven't come across a law that actually address this issue (meaning it flat out says if its legal or not). The satellite signal is an intangible. You do not possess control of it / detain it / prevent others from possessing.
    I have read where people have notified the satellite company of their errors but have still continued to receive without being charged for it. To me, It seems more of a moral issue (what makes you feel better) than a legal one.


    Your are comparing apples (intangible) to oranges (tangible) here. To find the item is not illegal. There is no law that requires you to give it to the lost and found or search out the proper owner. Again, more of a moral issue (what makes you feel better). However, if the owner asks for it back and you refuse, now you have a legal issue. <- this does not apply to intagibles


    hope that helps
     
  20. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    0
    Apr 14, 2002
    If the satellite or cable company cannot remove those specific channels after requests to do so then the moral thing to do is to not watch them but who is going to not be tempted to do so?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page