Scott Greczkowski said:
What excited me most about the article was a link on the side to an article saying that an amazon video app had been released for iPad.
DISH Enters Deal with ROKU
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 188
- Views 34K
What excited me most about the article was a link on the side to an article saying that an amazon video app had been released for iPad.
Almost exactly what i thought before any of this came out and I posted. A huge reason Roku wanted this was the threat of being shut down or sued. I didn't think and now even more am convinced Roku was just not equipped to handle the situation. Big bad Dish probably did complain about illegal channels like Euronews. But Roku almost certainly was looking for a partner.
Only in the land of the free can these companies moan about people getting stuff for free. And get away with it.
Dish World only provides Arabic, Brazilian and multiple Indian language channels. (Did anyone even know what they provided before they defended this decision?)
Why did ALL other non competing international channels have to come down?
Why did ALL other non competing international channels have to come down?
yaz96 said:
Because they weren't officially licensed for content distribution in the US? The linked article does mention that as an issue Roku considered when making this deal. Granted, this probably is not true of all the channels that were pulled, but I'm not sure how one could go about finding out if a channel was legitimately provided or not.
FYI: Brazilian isn't a language. Portuguese is the language spoken in Brazil.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
Glad i was one of the lucky ones that downloaded english tv premium from the app store before it was removed. Get every english tv channel BBC ITC Channel 4 etc. Can watch the Olympics with out that USA bias
FYI: Brazilian isn't a language. Portuguese is the language spoken in Brazil.
Kinda like American isn't a language. English is the language spoken in America. Of course they don't sound quite the same in either case.....
Kinda like American isn't a language. English is the language spoken in America. Of course they don't sound quite the same in either case.....
Actually US English is the language spoken in the US. It's quite different from the language spoken in the UK. Why on earth do they call eggplants aubergines?
In all seriousness, I wonder if this explains all the Roku's people allegedly gotten from Dish after complaining about the AMC/We mess.
Because they weren't officially licensed for content distribution in the US? The linked article does mention that as an issue Roku considered when making this deal. Granted, this probably is not true of all the channels that were pulled, but I'm not sure how one could go about finding out if a channel was legitimately provided or not.
FYI: Brazilian isn't a language. Portuguese is the language spoken in Brazil.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
A comment from where the article was -
Vasya
Thursday, July 26 2012
Over the top channels do not require a US broadcast license since Internet is not a regulated environment. Apparently, roku is proving it otherwise.
=====================
FYI - YOU would call a TV channel in Brazil, Portuguese?
No, I didn't think so. You would call it a Brazilian channel, now wouldn't you? Or maybe not.
======================
My point was, (which you so eloquently ignored), DISH DOES NOT provide the programming to replace ALL the various international channels that were taken down. They only provide a VERY limited selection of languages. But it sounds like they demanded that ALL others be taken down.
Last edited:
yaz96 said:
Go back and take a look at your post, you didn't call it a Brazilian channel, you referenced "... Brazilian ... language channels" if you had left off the language part, as you did in your follow up comment, I wouldn't had added my FYI. Brazilian channels yes, but they're Portuguese language channels.
yaz96 said:
Didn't ignore it, this was my possible explanation: "Because they weren't officially licensed for content distribution in the US?"
yaz96 said:
This is patently not true. The material is copyright protected. If you don't have the right to broadcast it, doing so is illegal. Hence the DMCA take down notices that Roku mentioned receiving. I can't just take my HBO programming and make it available to the public on the Internet on the theory that it's ok because the Internet is not a regulated environment and therefore to broadcast on it a license is not needed. Hell, why is Netflix paying so much for streaming content when it's unnecessary to do so according to that commentator?
Maybe the commenter was confusing OTA broadcasting licenses (clearly not at issue) with the consent/permission of the rights holders that would be needed to broadcast content (also called licensing rights)? If he was confusing the former with the later, then his comment would make some sense (although way off base and unrelated to what the Roku representative discussed).
Yes they speak Portugese in Brail but it'[s different then the Portugese spoken in Portugal. Like the difference between American Engiish and British English or Spanish in Spain or Mexico.
juan said:
I would guess that the copyright owners were the ones to send the DMCA take down notices, not Dish. I'm not familiar with the DMCA process enough to know if Dish could initiate the process for content it only has the license to distribute rather than ownership of. Maybe someone with more knowledge could chime in?
So I'll leave it open: it may be possible that Dish was in some way involved in defending the content that it had paid a license for, but it probably wouldn't be able to "blackmail" Roku over the other channels that Dish doesn't have the rights for and doesn't distribute via their Roku offerings.
Regardless, blackmail doesn't strike me as the correct description.
Similar threads
