DISH Drops AMC Networks (AMC Back on DISH channel 131)

[Mike_H]

Possession of copyrighted material without license or ownership of the material is in and of itself illegal. Doesn't matter how you got it or how you stored it. (usenet, torrent, vhs cassette recording of a SD feed from your neighbor )

Big mistake for AMC if they don't allow the walking dead on the various streaming partners like they do for their other popular shows. Dish doesn't give a rats arse, and all it will do is either cause AMC to loose more viewers, or loose more revenue as the clever viewers find a way to watch the show without AMC earning anything.

Dish may be causing some issues for itself here, but AMC is really hurting themselves if they don't provide a way for those with dish or without any provider to get a show they want.

 

[whatchel1]

NO free newsfeed.

 

[KAB]

I Google'd....found nothing about said delay to Amazon/iTunes.

 

[coltrane679]

I see a lot of ipse dixit in these recent posts, but no citations whatsoever to any credible legal authority (such as a court decision construing a specific statute). Forgive me if I ask more from amateur internet lawyers. If it is so fricking obvious it should be easy to show such authorities.

 

[dangue]

I see a lot of ipse dixit in these recent posts, but no citations whatsoever to any credible legal authority (such as a court decision construing a specific statute). Forgive me if I ask more from amateur internet lawyers. If it is so fricking obvious it should be easy to show such authorities.

I'm not going to dig into it to find the statutory citation, but... What are you doing when you download a movie or program? You're making a copy of it. What is another word for copying? Reproducing. Which is in all those lovely FBI warnings at the start of movies expressly stating that reproducing or distributing is illegal.

Exact text:

"Warning: The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to five years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000."

Please note it is an "or" statement. Reproduction itself is enough to get you, it doesn't have to be reproduction with intent to distribute. Barring some sort of safe harbor (like the fair use exception) unauthorized downloading is illegal. That may leave some wiggle room for a streaming end user (since ostensibly the stream viewer is not making a copy), but without doing some research I wouldn't hold my breath. I definitely wouldn't assume that the FBI warning covers the entirety of copyright protection statutes.

As for statutory backing for the FBI statement? A quick google search on my iPhone didn't pull up the specifics statutes, but I'm sure a little poking around can find them. I'm just not willing to put in the effort now.

Edit to add: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ is the place to start for statutory authority related to copyright law. At a glance, I'd look to chapter five as a starting point.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[coltrane679]

Guys, you play lawyer very badly.

First of all, the "FBI Warning" is a generalized summary of the law, not the law itself. (The edit adding Title 17 is more to the point)

Second, even accepting that we should use this generalized summary of the law as "the law" (which we shouldn't), you just infer that DLing is "reproduction". That is non-obvious.

Statutes are "the law". They are construed by courts. While I respect your right to have an opinion, it is the formal opinions of the courts that count, not what you or I say, think or "interpret".

Cases, please. Internet opinions I don't need--I can make up my own. These cases very well may exist--I've just didn't see them when I last looked intently (probably a couple of years ago). Everything I found was some kind of P2P, where I perfectly understand the alleged illegality.

 

[coltrane679]

BTW, here is a better way to view Tile 17:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17

Also, beware of terms of art that you THINK you know the "common sense" meaning--they are not necessarily the same thing.

 

[TNGTony]

Downloading/obtaining copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder is a violation of the copyright and copyright law. The copyright holder could sue or file criminal charges for obtaining an unauthorized copy of their copyrighted material. The fact that there aren't any cases one can pull up on the internet doesn't mean it's not a violation. And I suspect unless the case was identical to every possible situation and exception one could think of, nothing would be sufficient to sway one wanting to download copyrighted material without the holder's permission.

The only exception in copyright law is you are allowed to make a copy of material you already own for your own personal use (not to give to a friend) (Sony vs Universal Studios 1984)(Audio Home Recording Act 1992). Until there is another U.S. Supreme Court case(or lower court case) that makes another exception in copyright law, the assumption is exclusionary, not permissive.

Therefore advice and instructions on how to illegally/unlawfully download copyrighted material from any source is not encouraged here.

Move along... move along... nothing more to see here

 

[wbrightfl]

I will have AMC HD back on Friday, plus CW in HD, FearNet HD, Me-tv, IFC, WE, Sundance and the Weather Channel Local forecast as I have Bright House scheduled for an install. Fortunately BH Central Florida has the channels I watch in HD. After 9 years with Dish I am finally leaving due to programming. Dish used to be the leader in programming, not so much any more. I am leaving my Dish on the roof and the cable intact in case Dish improves down the road. By the looks of their recent events it won't be any time soon.

 

[Tampa8]

There always seems to be some who will argue something is legal so they can get it for free when they know it's not legal.

 

[Tampa8]

I have Bright House scheduled for an install.

Congratulations?

 

[gpollock87]

I will have AMC HD back on Friday, plus CW in HD, FearNet HD, Me-tv, IFC, WE, Sundance and the Weather Channel Local forecast as I have Bright House scheduled for an install. Fortunately BH Central Florida has the channels I watch in HD. After 9 years with Dish I am finally leaving due to programming. Dish used to be the leader in programming, not so much any more. I am leaving my Dish on the roof and the cable intact in case Dish improves down the road. By the looks of their recent events it won't be any time soon.

glad to see you will be getting FEARnet. I know you have been wanting it for a long time as well.

 

[The Fat Man]

Great you got what you wanted wflightfl. As for MeTV Dish and Directv chose not to use up transponder space for digital subchannels that didn't broadcast the major four networks. Considering many people get the OTA option. Try being up here, WMUR DT2 has MeTV for New Hampshire and it covers most of Eastern Massachusetts. WMFP DT1 has it for Boston. Now we learned that WCVB is adding it as a DT2 service. So now we get RTV on WMFP DT2, This TV on WHDH DT2, and three outlets for MeTV. As for the CW in HD, I don't get it in HD as well. But, I much rather have it in SD and get a west coast feed from KTLA so when my wife wants to DVR her teen girl programing it doesn't conflict with the other shows we watch. Or even worse use up the main tv's DVR so I get a Bruins game cut off.

 

[KAB]

Great you got what you wanted wflightfl. As for MeTV Dish and Directv chose not to use up transponder space for digital subchannels that didn't broadcast the major four networks. Considering many people get the OTA option. Try being up here, WMUR DT2 has MeTV for New Hampshire and it covers most of Eastern Massachusetts. WMFP DT1 has it for Boston. Now we learned that WCVB is adding it as a DT2 service. So now we get RTV on WMFP DT2, This TV on WHDH DT2, and three outlets for MeTV. As for the CW in HD, I don't get it in HD as well. But, I much rather have it in SD and get a west coast feed from KTLA so when my wife wants to DVR her teen girl programing it doesn't conflict with the other shows we watch. Or even worse use up the main tv's DVR so I get a Bruins game cut off.

Whew!!! That nearly wore me out. But still don't get your point other than get an antenna.

 

[Taderz]

There are plenty of sites to stream from and never take possession of the show. When the show is done, nothing on your HD. No fuss no muss.

 

[Ghpr13]

Ladies and gentlemen....In one corner freedom to view whatever you want, any way you able to, the American way!...and in the other corner, truth, justice, and the American way!
Wait, how can that be...

Ghpr13

Go Bears!

 

[Mojo Jojo]

According to a CBS News story (http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?catid=57512910&feed_id=999&videofeed=999), it is expected for AMC Networks and Dish to reach a settlement before a September 19 trial date. However, I think it is important to remember that anything can happen. If they do come back, it would be nice to see them in HD.

If you cannot view the link, here is the CBS News story:

Ahead of the Bell: AMC Networks
September 14, 2012


NEW YORK &#8212 Susquehanna reiterated its positive outlook and rating on AMC Networks, predicting that the company will reach a settlement with Dish Network Corp. before their dispute goes to trial.

Dish dropped AMC's Voom suite of channels, but AMC claims Dish violated a long-term agreement to carry them and is suing for $2.5 billion. A trial is set to start Sept. 19.

The satellite TV provider, which has 14 million subscribers, has blacked out AMC channels since July 1. It says the channels cost too much and that it would prefer to negotiate only for the flagship channel AMC, which is home to popular shows such as "Breaking Bad" and "The Walking Dead." Dish would prefer to do without lesser-watched channels WE tv, IFC and Sundance Channel.

Vasily Karasyov said he expects the two parties to reach an agreement and for it to include the return of AMC channels to Dish's lineup.

"We readily acknowledge the higher than usual degree of uncertainty around this call," Karasyov wrote in a note to investors. "However, we think that our analysis of the situation and possible outcomes from the legal and business standpoints provide enough foundation for a 'Positive' rating at this point."

Karasyov said shares of AMC Networks Inc. could reach his $51 price target within the next 12 months if AMC gets a settlement that involves the return of its channels to Dish. He also predicted that investors will become more positive toward the stock as the second anniversary of AMC's spin off from Cablevision Systems Corp. approaches, which is the point at which spun-off companies can be sold.

 

[satjay]

Read that to, I was wondering what others think about this. If this is really something that has a chance of happening?

 

[primestar31]

Read that to, I was wondering what others think about this. If this is really something that has a chance of happening?

Charlie is a GREAT poker player, that's what I would answer... He's a master at bluffing. You win some, and you lose some, but you never show your cards too early. You have to ask yourself, who has the most to lose here? This is the tinyest battle in his war.

I think AMC will be back sooner or later, but Charlie will get something out of it, beyond a bill for $1 billion on the Voom issue.

 

[Mojo Jojo]

Read that to, I was wondering what others think about this. If this is really something that has a chance of happening?

I think that Charlie/Dish would return the AMC networks (AMC, IFC, We TV, and Sundance Channel) in lieu of paying the amount of money that AMC Networks is suing for.