EchoStar Rejected by High Court Justice, Must Halt Distant Networks

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by Chris Blount, Aug 22, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Aug 23, 2006 #61 of 244
    Mike D-CO5

    Mike D-CO5 Hall Of Fame

    Mar 11, 2003
    Funny the next Charlie Chat is on 9/11/07 . I wonder if there is any connection with the injunction date? Maybe an announcement of somekind of settlement with the networks or maybe a sad announcement. Strange that the day is on a date with so much significance to this country.
  2. Aug 23, 2006 #62 of 244

    foghorn2 AllStar

    Jun 17, 2006
    Agreed, that day signifies group of fanaticals showing their true evil, government failure, and a major losses to americans. I'd say the day is fitting :nono:
  3. Aug 23, 2006 #63 of 244

    JohnH Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    The date of the chat is of no significance as they are usually on the second Monday of the month. The date of the injunction postponement could be of some significance, but IMHO it is a poor choice of dates if it was intended to be of the same significance as the 911 activity was.

    BTW: Should say 9/11/06. Time flies, no need to speed it up. :)
  4. Aug 23, 2006 #64 of 244

    wkomorow DBSTalk Club Member

    Apr 22, 2002
    I think that Dish will find a legal or financial solution to the DVR dispute with TIVO and will not allow DVRs to go black. On the other hand, I don't see how E* will get out of the Distant Network dispute; distant networks are history on E*. To be honest, I won't miss distant networks. Except for news, I watch less than 3 hours a week of network TV. To keep customers, E* could add the remaining locals and work out a deal to add neighboring stations for missing networks. If this happens, one would hope that E* would be aggressive about adding SV channels to local packages. It will both take some of the sting from losing distants and will allow the NAB to no end - and guess what there is nothing they can do about it.
  5. Aug 23, 2006 #65 of 244

    minnow Legend

    Apr 25, 2002
    If E* is going to supply networks from "neighboring area's" to subscribers that are unserved becasue they do not have networks originating in their own areas, isn't that really backdooring the DNS concept ? I live in a white area so what is the difference if I get DNS from LA or from a city in my state ? Both network feeds orginate outside of my area.
  6. Aug 23, 2006 #66 of 244

    toomuchtv Godfather

    May 17, 2002
    Do I understand correctly that if E* doesn't carry your locals or if your locals don't include all the networks, then you STILL lose the distants?
  7. Aug 23, 2006 #67 of 244

    finniganps Hall Of Fame

    Jan 23, 2004
    Yeah, that was my understanding. If that's true, they will lose a lot of customers. Seems to me it should also apply to Direct since they also supply distants.
  8. Aug 23, 2006 #68 of 244

    JohnH Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    When/if the injunction becomes effective, there will be no disatants, period.

    Significantly Viewed is nice, but they have to negotiate with each individual station for carriage.
  9. Aug 23, 2006 #69 of 244

    kenglish Icon

    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    The only "settlement" that would work is the one that should have happened long, long ago. E* knew they were breaking the law by not keeping a leash on the "SHVA monster".

    The current "settlements" are between network O&Os and E*....not between E* and the thousands of individual network affiliates (the "franchise owners"). They were the ones getting hurt by losing viewers.

    E* is being punished for breaking the law time and a drunk driver who gets stopped over and over. You finally take HIS license and car keys, to get HIM off the road. You don't take the licenses from the other drivers, too.

    Legit DNS subs can switch to D*. Everyone on E* can get their local stations, or the nearest L-I-L. No one is harmed.
  10. Aug 23, 2006 #70 of 244

    JohnH Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    DirecTV settled. Why should they lose the privilege of selling distants?
  11. Aug 23, 2006 #71 of 244

    PBowie Legend

    Jan 4, 2006
    One day-maybe just one day we will see a win for the consumer and not the networks.

    I live iin Florida , get local channels, lets say my wife is from dallas and wants to keep up with the local news there, why cant we if we are willing to pay
    get Dallas locals as well !!

    whats the difference between us getting Dallas locals than to going on the net to read Dallas newspapers?

    the whole thing sucks and so does any government that panders to corporations interests instead of the people.

    revolution my brothers and sisters ! lets get back to what the consitution stands for !
    all govt is corrupt and in the pockets of special interests and big corporations who pay for them.

    anyway-I want to watch and pay for anything I wish !! so much for freedom of choice !
  12. Aug 23, 2006 #72 of 244
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    May 5, 2003
    Let me recap this for those of you that have missed it:

    Because the courts found too much abuse by Dish Network on the license that enables Dish Network to give customers distant networks, Dish Network loses use of the license. So, the same answer is given to all these questions...

    If I have waivers, do I lose my distant networks?
    If I am grandfathered, do I lose my distant networks?
    If I am in a "white area", do I lose my distant networks?
    If I have an RV waiver, do I lose my distant networks?

    Because the courts have injuncted use of the license, the answer to the questions above is, "YES, distant networks are lost".

    There are work arounds, but they won't apply to everyone. Dish Network could settle with the broadcasters, to stop the process from remaining in the courts, leaving the license to broadcast distant networks untouched. Originally, there were eight groups in the suit, but ABC, NBC and CBS have reached an agreement. The five remaining groups are FOX and the affiliate boards of all four networks. If Dish Network comes to an agreement with the CBS affiliate board, then CBS is removed from the injunction. This applies to both the ABC and NBC affiliate boards, as well. Dish Network must settle with both FOX and the FOX affiliate board to stop the injunction on FOX distants.

    If Dish Network is allowed to import nearby affiliates, it is not a "distant network", it is "significantly viewed", which is a completely different criteria. This could have been done already; after all, Dish Network has a few markets where they are already providing significantly viewed stations (as Baltimore is one market where it is offered).
  13. Aug 23, 2006 #73 of 244
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    May 5, 2003
    What's the difference of going on the net to the Dallas stations' websites and watch the news there?

    Well, the difference is that the Dallas local station is controlling their distribution. However, when it pertains to "distant networks" as we know them, the local stations do not control their own distribution.

    The local Dallas station does not own a copyright license to redistribute the network and syndicated programming nationwide. So they cannot sell anyone in Florida their programming. It is against their contracts with the networks and the syndicators.
  14. Aug 23, 2006 #74 of 244

    derwin0 Icon

    Jan 31, 2005
    Easy to fix. Just have the distant network available only during Network programming time.
  15. Aug 23, 2006 #75 of 244
    Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    May 5, 2003
    But not so easy to fix. I think the network-affiliate agreements allow for first-run broadcast rights. Therefore, the network has problems simply throwing out a customer-subscription network feed without changing the network-affiliate agreements.
  16. Aug 23, 2006 #76 of 244

    wkomorow DBSTalk Club Member

    Apr 22, 2002
    Copyright is the major issue. If Dish were to transmit a network into a DMA that does not have that network - there would be no local channel to sue. Although it is true that Dish needs retrans for SV channels, foe some of us these channels are a necessity. With a dual-tuner DVR, I really do not have to time-shift. However, we are feed our networks from upstate NY. They have gotten better, but many of the stations have a habit of pre-empting programming. We have been treated to religious programming, the many hats of Mary Lou Whitney, Congressman McSweeny has a tummy ache - we will stay with the story all night, how to make our local urban violence-riddle schools better - I'm not in an urban area and we have some of the best performing schools in the country,how a thunderstorm is born.

    Slight (but not much of an) exaggeration, every time there is a flurry - we will stay with this storm all night. I have missed more programs because of local channels following snow storms - well I am a native New Englander - really unless we are talking more than 2 feet of snow at once, it really has no really impact on me - especially at night - just let me watch my programs.
  17. Aug 23, 2006 #77 of 244

    steveT Legend

    Jul 12, 2002
    I was an original Primetime 24 subscriber. And I've done everything a citizen can do to fight to keep distants over the years: I've written Senators and Congressmen, I've gone to their local public forums and brought the issue up for public debate, I've called their offices, I've written letters, and on and on... And in the end, I lost all four DNS feeds from NY and LA years ago, so I find it shocking to read in that court decision that supposedly NO Dish customer ever lost their DNS per any congressional or judicial ruling. That's totally untrue.

    And, I've done everything I can to work with the local stations (Dallas) to get them to try to fix their audio and video feeds so I wouldn't need DNS in the first place. The Dallas ABC station has horrible picture quality: grainy and low res. The Dallas NBC station has had a thick, stationary, white bar running right down the left center of the screen for years, and no one else here seems to care (I can see it even when I go to local TV stores that carry dish, so it's not my equipment...) The Dallas Fox station is half decent. And the Dallas CBS station has grainy video and virtually NO stereo sound.

    So, after months of working with them to try to fix it (which the local ABC station did, for a few years until all the original video problems crept back), I finally begged all of them for waivers. Only the CBS affiliate here finally agreed with me that the picture and sound quality they were delivering to Dish was so bad, and they could not fix without expensive equipment upgrades, that they granted me a waiver. And now that I have both NY and Dallas CBS feeds, it's so easy to see the difference. I can PIP and swap them quickly on my 721, and it's amazing to see how much worse the Dallas video is, and hear how the stereo goes away.

    So now years of work goes down the drain, thanks to this travesty of justice. All I ever wanted was decent video and sound on big budget shows like "Lost" or "24". And now I won't be able to get it unless I spend thousands on an HDTV, or move jobs to a different city.
  18. Aug 23, 2006 #78 of 244

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    Kansas City KS
    It boils down to "if Dish had played by the rules" on DNS, they wouldn't be in this pickle.

    Steve T - it isn't "thousands on HDTV" anymore - you can get very reasonable HDTV's WITH BUILTIN ATSC tuners for under $1000 now, or you can buy an ATSC set top box for around $200 on the net. And this set top box will be able to output to your current NTSC (analog) TV, just like your DBS receivers.

    I suppose I'm a bit spoiled by having really excellent local stations with wonderful reception (at about 20-25 miles from their towers, one is at ~40 miles) - even the 2 Sinclair owned stations do decent NTSC broadcasts. I can't speak for their digital yet, but WRAL is probably the nation's leader in HDTV (certainly one of the first), and it shows on their NTSC as well. The only reason I take the locals is to be able to DVR them (that's another issue).
  19. Aug 23, 2006 #79 of 244

    BobMurdoch Hall Of Fame

    Apr 24, 2002
    Sky Report states that E* has offered $100 million to settle the case while the braodcasters want $300 Million. E* estimates that as many as 400,000 customers would bolt if the distants go away. That's about $500 a subscriber.

    It boils down as to which scenario they value more.... the 400,000 subscribers or the $300 million.

    Judging from his past experience, I think he will kiss off the subscribers and blame the whole mess on the courts and Congress's lack of action on the matter.

    We all know that Charlie isn't afraid of brinksmanship. He has no problem screwing us over in the short term to get a better deal.. The question then becomes.... IF he gets them back, do we have to go through the process to get our waivers back from square 1? It took me years to get some of them after numerous attempts....

    My 622 glitched Monday night trying to record Treasure Hunters as my tuner 2 stopped seeing the satellite.. After a power inserter and receiver reboot, and subsequent check switch I got it back. No big deal, I recorded the later feed off the west coast. My 622 timer insurance goes out the window if this goes through....

    My situation is minor compared to the rural areas that really get screwed here.... They may be the only group that can force Congress to rewrite the laws...
  20. Aug 23, 2006 #80 of 244

    FLWingNut Godfather

    Nov 19, 2005
    Hard to believe ALL network affliates of a major market like Dallas have crappy audio and video. Do all Dallas subscribers have this problem? Wouldn't we have heard about it? Is it broadcast OTA that way, or is it just in the feed that Dish gets? If it's the latter, and Dish won't fix it, sounds like it's time to dump Dish and go to cable or D*.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

spam firewall