[HDSC]

I don't know how to code this so I will just tell it like it is. My daughter lives in Savannah, GA and she stays with us 4 days a week in Charleston, SC while she is finishing her BS degree. She is a military wife (Citadel guy) has one child with one on the way. Anyway, we got sports/HBO and they have Max and something else, we both have whole house. She likes to watch the Savannah locals and my wife likes to watch the Charleston locals. Wife will be staying every weekend soon in Savannah, GA.
Can I just swap out a unit for a unit and add it on the whole house Deca system? We both have identical HR23's so I was thinking just swap those? No intent to cheat any money, just trying to make two girls in my life happy. And you know what they say: If ...... ain't happy nobodys happy!

Sorry to be so long winded.

 

[RobertE]

It would be against the terms of service for both of you. Also it's very possibley that the two spotbeams do not overlap.

 

[harsh]

Assuming that the MRV networks (whether DECA connected or otherwise) are both Internet connected, you'll have receivers on the same account phoning home from different IP addresses. This is a red flag.

Having the swapped DVRs call in from the other account's IP address is likely a red flag with a number of flashing neon arrows pointing at it.

 

[jdspencer]

I think the Slingbox would solve this problem.

 

[HDSC]

YEP: Time Warner has a good system maybe DTV will one day. I had no intention of violating and TOS. So we will nix that Idea and I don't even know if they overlap anyway.

Thanks for the comments.

 

[RobertE]

Assuming that the MRV networks (whether DECA connected or otherwise) are both Internet connected, you'll have receivers on the same account phoning home from different IP addresses. This is a red flag.

Having the swapped DVRs call in from the other account's IP address is likely a red flag with a number of flashing neon arrows pointing at it.

:nono2:

 

[HoTat2]

It would be against the terms of service for both of you. Also it's very possibley that the two spotbeams do not overlap.

Just checked doctor j's spotbeam mapping data, and the Savannah and Charleston SC local transponders (Tps. 17 and 18) actually share the same Ka band spotbeam "A3B2" on D11 at 99W. So a receiver swap should work at least for HD locals in both markets. Not sure about the Ku band SD locals as no mapping data is posted for their spots and Charleston don't have any (MPEG-4 only market). But it may be a safe assumption that Savannah's SD locals coming from 119W (D7S) indeed overlap into the Charleston DMA as well.

But as you say the TOS implications may be a different story.

If its a judged to be a permanent receiver swap then that may be viewed as a violation of the TOS. However if it is case where a subscriber much like a tailgater, "temporarily" takes a receiver with them on a trip to visit relatives in a different LiL market to watch DIRECTV programming during the stay, yet "happens" to be able to receive their out of market locals by sheer coincidence of them being on the same SB, is that still a violation of the TOS?

 

[texasbrit]

As you suggest, it is a violation of the TOS but no more than the person who tailgates, or takes a receiver with them in their RV. If you had an RV, put a receiver in it and parked outside your daughter's house every weekend, would that suddenly make it OK? Since all these situations (RV, tailgating etc) are violations of the TOS it's difficult to have any rational conversation about it.

 

[veryoldschool]

As you suggest, it is a violation of the TOS but no more than the person who tailgates, or takes a receiver with them in their RV. If you had an RV, put a receiver in it and parked outside your daughter's house every weekend, would that suddenly make it OK? Since all these situations (RV, tailgating etc) are violations of the TOS it's difficult to have any rational conversation about it.

RVs may not be the best example, since they have a special account for this.

 

[texasbrit]

Many (most?) people with RVs do not use the "special RV account", unless they are fulltime RVers, because otherwise you need to pay for two accounts. They just take one of their receivers with them - just like tailgating. In breach of the TOS - for sure!!

 

[harsh]

Seems like there's a need for a refresh read for everyone on the TOS. They (CA and ELA) were altered last year and became less specific towards transporting equipment around. The Equipment Lease Addendum language about moving and relocating receivers looks to be GONE.

For its part, the Customer Agreement no longer seems to speak to your residence or informing them of service address changes; only that you maintain your contact information. The only hitch would appear to be the phone connections requirement (Customer Agreement section 1f) which seems to be substantially ignored by both subscribers and DIRECTV.

By the letter of the TOS, I'm not sure that what the OP proposes is expressly (or even non-expressly) prohibited. Your interpretation may be decidedly different, but it must be based on the current agreements and not what you hope, assume or remember them to be.

 

[DogLover]

Seems like there's a need for a refresh read for everyone on the TOS. They (CA and ELA) were altered last year and became less specific towards transporting equipment around. The Equipment Lease Addendum language about moving and relocating receivers looks to be GONE.

For its part, the Customer Agreement no longer seems to speak to your residence or informing them of service address changes; only that you maintain your contact information. The only hitch would appear to be the phone connections requirement (Customer Agreement section 1f) which seems to be substantially ignored by both subscribers and DIRECTV.

By the letter of the TOS, I'm not sure that what the OP proposes is expressly (or even non-expressly) prohibited. Your interpretation may be decidedly different, but it must be based on the current agreements and not what you hope, assume or remember them to be.

I think you may have missed the part in the phone connections section that states that you agree to give "true and accurate" information about the location of the receivers.

So, if the boxes were moved to a new city without telling DIRECTV, it would be a violation of the terms of service.

It certainly appears that short-term temporary moves (such as tailgating) are not enforced as violations. One can even say they are encouraged by their commercials. However, the black and white if the agreement would indicate tht these should be designated as mobile units, or DIRECTV should be notified of these moves.

 

[harsh]

I think you may have missed the part in the phone connections section that states that you agree to give "true and accurate" information about the location of the receivers.

I did indeed miss that part.

Perhaps you could explain where the exceptions for tailgating and the like appears? If it isn't written, can you take advantage/be held to it?

 

[DogLover]

I did indeed miss that part.

Perhaps you could explain where the exceptions for tailgating and the like appears? If it isn't written, can you take advantage/be held to it?

I never said their were exceptions for tailgating. I said that they appeared not to enforce that provision for short term temporary moves. In fact, in the case of tailgating, their commercials seem to actively encourage that. That's much different that having a written exception in their customer agreement.

 

[harsh]

I never said their were exceptions for tailgating. I said that they appeared not to enforce that provision for short term temporary moves. In fact, in the case of tailgating, their commercials seem to actively encourage that. That's much different that having a written exception in their customer agreement.

If they don't enforce it, can they? There doesn't seem to be any "spirit of the law" involved here.

I wasn't accusing you of espousing the idea that tailgating was specifically allowed. I was simply noting that many seem to think that it garners special treatment in the TOS and that's clearly not the case.

 

[DogLover]

If they don't enforce it, can they? There doesn't seem to be any "spirit of the law" involved here.

I wasn't accusing you of espousing the idea that tailgating was specifically allowed. I was simply noting that many seem to think that it garners special treatment in the TOS and that's clearly not the case.

I agree that the TOS does not carve out any special treatment for tailgating. It appears they would fall into the "mobile" category, which would exclude them from being eligible for mirroring fees.

I assume that like any good business, they will spend more time and energy going after customer agreement violators that cost them the most money. Where customer agreement terms are dictated by other contracts and federal regulations, they will enforce them to the extent that those third parties are satisfied.

Where does that leave th average Joe Six-Pack tailgater? Only Joe can decide.

 

[texasbrit]

Yes, there's no special treatment for tailgating (or for taking a receiver in an RV for the weekend). It's just that DirecTV knows these things happen, and turns a blind eye to these situations, because it's not worth sending the "TOS police" after the "offenders" (even if you could identify who the "offenders" were). It probably would not gain any revenue, and would upset a lot of people. Having people use DirecTV for tailgating is probably valuable free advertising.

 

[trh]

How about this from the Customer Agreement:

...if it is determined that the receiver is not at the location identified on your account, we may disconnect the receiver or charge you the full programming subscription price for the receiver.

 

[texasbrit]

Yes, we've read it before. It means that anyone who tailgates, or uses their receiver in their RV or at their weekend camp, is in breach of the TOS. It's been said a thousand times, no-one is arguing the point....