Comcast Sues DirecTV Over 'Deceptive' Claims of 'Free' Televised NFL Games & Response from DIRECTV

[dfergie]

Comcast has taken the end of the labor dispute as an opportunity to settle a beef with one of its rivals, satellite TV company DirectTV, which it accuses in a new lawsuit filed on Wednesday in Illinois federal court of deceptive advertising.

Source & More: hollywoodreporter.com

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I would agree with Comcast on this one... I have seen ads where it says the NFL Sunday Ticket is now included, but there is nothing on the screen saying for new customers only or anything like that. It makes it sound like the NFL Sunday Ticket is free for all DIRECTV customers. Very misleading.

 

[JerseyMatt]

It's in the fine print, where it always is. It says New customers only, with approved credit, 2 year commitment required, after rebate, automatically renews at renewal rate, blah blah blah. I've seen it. Just more baseless crap from Comcrap

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

It's in the fine print, where it always is. It says New customers only, with approved credit, 2 year commitment required, after rebate, blah blah blah. I've seen it.

No it's not I have been watching baseball on FOX or NASCAR and they read a voiceover. There are no disclaimers anywhere on the screen.

Search around and you will find someone posted some of these videos.

Now other commericals DO have the fine print, but the ones I am talking about did not, and therefore is deceptive.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Here is one of the videos..

?Joe Buck gives away Sunday Ticket for free?‏ - YouTube

 

[jcrandall]

I'm suprised it took this long for someone to go after legal action. I would have expected an attorney general or something, rather than Comcast.

Directv is running TV ads, radio ads, with minimial if any on screen / sound terms. I was at a ballgame and saw their blimp with the ad "Sunday ticket now included free". Didn't say any terms, just free.

I know I didn't get my Sunday Ticket free....

Didn't expect it free, but they shouldn't be that general in their advertising.

 

[JerseyMatt]

That's not a commercial, it's a bumper. The commercial comes next. And all of their commercials have their fine print. So if you think Comcast has a leg to stand on because of a bumper, why isn't AT&T suing Sprint for not disclosing their 2 year contract/ETF for whatever their bumper said? Because I betcha there was no fine print on theirs either. It's nitpicking. The radio and print ads have all the required disclaimers too.

 

[pro96]

Lame Lame and Lame

Sent from my Motorola Dynatac 8000X using Tapetalk.

 

[JerseyMatt]

Honestly what it sounds like is Comcast is all butthurt because they ran the numbers and figured out how many customers they lost to this offer. They won't win this if they are basing it on MLB bumpers, which have NEVER had fine print for ANY of their sponsors.

 

[harshness]

Honestly what it sounds like is Comcast is all butthurt because they ran the numbers and figured out how many customers they lost to this offer. They won't win this if they are basing it on MLB bumpers, which have NEVER had fine print for ANY of their sponsors.

Given DIRECTV's Q2 subscriber numbers, it doesn't look like anybody needs to be crying about giving up a lot of customers to DIRECTV.

This is just an extension of the tit-for-tat argument that's been going on for a while about HD channel counts. In the end, it would be nice if the T&Cs in fine print didn't contain more information than the rest of the commercial. At some point, they're going to have to publish multiple page info-ads in magazines to back up their TV commercials like the drug companies do.

 

[king3pj]

During the tigers games on FSN Detroit they are having the announcers read a bump, or whatever you guys are calling it, every game now. They say switch to Comcast Xfinity and get the most live sports. I am a Dish customer and I know were not in the running but I would think Directv would have something to say about Comcast claiming to carry the most live sports.

I'm not sure if they carry MLB EI but I'm guessing they do. Still, Doesn't Directv carry every sports package Comcast has plus Sunday Ticket? I don't subscribe to either service or any premium sports packages but it sounds like they are flat out lying to me.

 

[ranmic]

I can understand the claim from Comcast but honestly you have to be pretty stupid to think you can get something that popular for free......but we all know the world is full of stupid people.

 

[JerseyMatt]

During the tigers games on FSN Detroit they are having the announcers read a bump, or whatever you guys are calling it, every game now. They say switch to Comcast Xfinity and get the most live sports. I am a Dish customer and I know were not in the running but I would think Directv would have something to say about Comcast claiming to carry the most live sports.

I'm not sure if they carry MLB EI but I'm guessing they do. Still, Doesn't Directv carry every sports package Comcast has plus Sunday Ticket? I don't subscribe to either service or any premium sports packages but it sounds like they are flat out lying to me.

You're absolutely right about ST. Plus I didn't see anything in Comcast's lineup about Nascar Hot Pass, UEFA, rugby, or cricket. Yes it's niche, but you have to count them when you make your claim of "most live sports". So yes, they are flat out lying.

But as far as the bumpers, Comcast is doing the exact same thing. They have 5 seconds to get their point across in order to hold your interest so you watch the commercial rather than change the channel. There is never fine print or a "micro machine man" legalese reading. Its sole purpose is to direct you to watch the commercial to get the details

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

No matter how you try to defend it, a bumper is a commercial.

I would say it's not a well written Bumper at best.

 

[JerseyMatt]

No matter how you try to defend it, a bumper is a commercial.

I would say it's not a well written Bumper at best.

Given the number of bumpers, "Sponsored By", and "Brought to you by"s that are read every single day, all without legalese or disclaimers, you can't give them any weight. To do so would set a dangerous precedent. Look closely at the next one you see. The one for Sprint won't mention their ETF or 2 year contract, the one for Weight Watchers won't disclose that the food is an extra charge, etc. It's a slippery slope. It's not a commercial in the true sense of the word, because it is not intended to convey all of the details, just to capture your interest so that you watch the commercial rather than change channels or go take a whizz.

 

[yaz96]

Given the number of bumpers, "Sponsored By", and "Brought to you by"s that are read every single day, all without legalese or disclaimers, you can't give them any weight. To do so would set a dangerous precedent. Look closely at the next one you see. The one for Sprint won't mention their ETF or 2 year contract, the one for Weight Watchers won't disclose that the food is an extra charge, etc. It's a slippery slope. It's not a commercial in the true sense of the word, because it is not intended to convey all of the details, just to capture your interest so that you watch the commercial rather than change channels or go take a whizz.

So defensive about DirecTv ads............

 

[JerseyMatt]

So defensive about DirecTv ads............

Meaning what? I'm only defending them due to the absurdity of the lawsuit. I hate frivolous crap like this.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Given the number of bumpers, "Sponsored By", and "Brought to you by"s that are read every single day, all without legalese or disclaimers, you can't give them any weight. To do so would set a dangerous precedent. Look closely at the next one you see. The one for Sprint won't mention their ETF or 2 year contract, the one for Weight Watchers won't disclose that the food is an extra charge, etc. It's a slippery slope. It's not a commercial in the true sense of the word, because it is not intended to convey all of the details, just to capture your interest so that you watch the commercial rather than change channels or go take a whizz.

A sprint bumper goes... "Get your new Evo 3D now exclusively from Sprint"
A DirecTV bumper goes "now get the NFL Sunday Ticket at no extra charge."

Tell me how thats not deceptive.

 

[hoky]

So existing customers of MANY years still have to pay for it? I thought I was gonna get it free this year.

 

[JerseyMatt]

A sprint bumper goes... "Get your new Evo 3D now exclusively from Sprint"
A DirecTV bumper goes "now get the NFL Sunday Ticket at no extra charge."

Tell me how thats not deceptive.

Neither one gives you all the details. To get the Evo 3D without paying $500 for it you have to sign a 2 year contract. With an ETF. And it's for new customers only at the advertised price. To get Sunday Ticket free you have to sign a 2 year contract. With an ETF. And it's for new customers only at the advertised price.

Oh and the Evo 3D isn't a Sprint exclusive. It's also available in a GSM version in Europe, which means you can buy it for use on AT&T (yes I know AT&T doesn't sell it yet), and the GSM version has FCC approval meaning it'll be available here soon.