Dish Network: Distant Networks

[srbond]

Well that makes more sense. I am curious what the resolution will be for downloaded tv shows from ABC.

It looks like http://peekvid.com/ had to remove it's shows due to copyright issues...

Two days ago they were up.

LOL!

It's just a matter of time before all the nets put their programming up for download.

ABC is and CBS is with sports. As soon as they figure out how to make money with it, the affiliates will not matter.

 

[HDTVFanAtic]

It looks like http://peekvid.com/ had to remove it's shows due to copyright issues...

Two days ago they were up.

LOL!

It's just a matter of time before all the nets put their programming up for download.

ABC is and CBS is with sports. As soon as they figure out how to make money with it, the affiliates will not matter.

And again, when they can make roughly $8Billion Revenue per network (along with the added bandwidth cost they don't have now) you are right, the affiliates will not matter - but that day is a LONG WAY OFF until people like you pay $8 or so dollars per network per month. Now, if you are willing to buy 4 weeks of shows at $2 each - and every family in america is willing to do the same for each network, then you have a business model. But not until then.

 

[Greg Bimson]

I won't be able to find the link, and this one is important...

Fox Network has filed a brief with the court. It basically states that a settlement does not take precedence over the direction that the Appeals Court has given this judge.

In other words, Fox has requested that the judge issue the injunction to terminate all distant network feeds of ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. The court was told to issue the injunction after finding Echostar guilty of willful infringement, and cutting off distant networks is the only penalty for willful infringement.

 

[Robert NTSC Archivist]

Wont that piss off all the other stations that are expecting there $125,000 check from Charlie. Sounds like DirecTV colusion



Bob

 

[Tom Bombadil]

End of the line for E* DNS?

SAN FRANCISCO, Aug 31 (Reuters) - A U.S. court on Thursday barred EchoStar Communications Corp. (DISH.O: Quote, Profile, Research) from retransmitting distant TV stations, adding weight to a recent settlement between the satellite television provider and broadcast networks.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Ft. Lauderdale granted a permanent injunction that bars EchoStar's Dish network from broadcasting distant stations, the term for network channels that do not originate in a subscriber's home region.

A copy of the federal court order was obtained by Reuters.

The injunction was requested by Fox Broadcast Co. on behalf of itself, ABC, CBS and NBC days after EchoStar agreed to pay the networks $100 million and terminate transmission of those channels to customers who are not eligible to receive them.

Fox asked the court to comply with an order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to enter the injunction to end the retransmission by EchoStar.

Last week, EchoStar failed to win an emergency stay from the U.S. Supreme Court to freeze the appeals court order.

Fox is a unit of News Corp. (NWS.N: Quote, Profile, Research), which also controls EchoStar's larger satellite TV rival, DirecTV Group. (DTV.N: Quote, Profile, Research).

Shares in EchoStar rose 0.2 percent to close at $31.75 on the Nasdaq. (Additional reporting by Yinka Adegoke in New York)

 

[srbond]

And again, when they can make roughly $8Billion Revenue per network (along with the added bandwidth cost they don't have now) you are right, the affiliates will not matter - but that day is a LONG WAY OFF until people like you pay $8 or so dollars per network per month. Now, if you are willing to buy 4 weeks of shows at $2 each - and every family in america is willing to do the same for each network, then you have a business model. But not until then.

The point is that some programming is already being offered by ABC... and I believe for for free.

As long as I can get 'Lost', it doesn't matter to me.

And even if it is not available to me, I have a friend who will digitally record it for me... that's not illegal.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Wont that piss off all the other stations that are expecting there $125,000 check from Charlie. Sounds like DirecTV colusion

No, the actual problem is that there was no way to avert the injunction once the Appeals Court sent it back to the District court.

Simply by finding Dish Network guilty of copyright infringement, as well as establishing a pattern or practice of willful infringement, the court has only one directive: permanent injunction of the license. Paying everyone $2 trillion wouldn't change that; the injunction must be issued.

 

[waltinvt]

No, the actual problem is that there was no way to avert the injunction once the Appeals Court sent it back to the District court.

Simply by finding Dish Network guilty of copyright infringement, as well as establishing a pattern or practice of willful infringement, the court has only one directive: permanent injunction of the license. Paying everyone $2 trillion wouldn't change that; the injunction must be issued.

Then why is Murdoch bothering to make himself look bad (kicking a horse when he's down so to speak) if the there was no chance the court was not going to eventually go through with the injunction anyway?

So about the only thing that can help Dish right now is if congress somehow steps in?

 

[Greg Bimson]

So about the only thing that can help Dish right now is if congress somehow steps in?

With a new law...

 

[ThomasRz]

The judge issued a order to show cause why the injunction should not be imposed (asking the parties if anything new has arisen since the CA11 decision - like the Supreme Court intervened and he hasn't been told). I think that is over. Murdoch doesn't want the judge dragging this out so if he files a motion and is denied, he goes back to Atlanta and says "Hey, Court of Appeals, this judge is flipping you the bird, maybe you want to enforce your order."

Then why is Murdoch bothering to make himself look bad (kicking a horse when he's down so to speak) if the there was no chance the court was not going to eventually go through with the injunction anyway?

So about the only thing that can help Dish right now is if congress somehow steps in?

 

[waltinvt]

The judge issued a order to show cause why the injunction should not be imposed (asking the parties if anything new has arisen since the CA11 decision - like the Supreme Court intervened and he hasn't been told). I think that is over. Murdoch doesn't want the judge dragging this out so if he files a motion and is denied, he goes back to Atlanta and says "Hey, Court of Appeals, this judge is flipping you the bird, maybe you want to enforce your order."

You know......how "D" is acting right now so stinks and I can honestly say I'd feel the same way if it were reversed and Chuck were doing this to DirectTV.

He couldn't just shut up and wait for the axe to fall. He has to jump in there and make sure it falls as soon as possible. You can almost see a twisted smile of glee. Reminds me of that human slug in "Once Upon A Time In The West".

It's beyond being about the law or who's legally entitled to what - it's about ethics and professionalism and as far as I'm concerned Murdoch just proved he doesn't have either. What a choice we have!

 

[Juan]

You know......how "D" is acting right now so stinks and I can honestly say I'd feel the same way if it were reversed and Chuck were doing this to DirectTV.

He couldn't just shut up and wait for the axe to fall. He has to jump in there and make sure it falls as soon as possible. You can almost see a twisted smile of glee. Reminds me of that human slug in "Once Upon A Time In The West".

It's beyond being about the law or who's legally entitled to what - it's about ethics and professionalism and as far as I'm concerned Murdoch just proved he doesn't have either. What a choice we have!

If you look @ 2nd quarter sub net ads..D* was about 100,000 e* was (approx) 200,000.. Murdoch has basiacally run d* into the ground.. The only thing he can do now is scavage a few subs from e*.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Good lord, we are now going to discuss subscriber adds...

DirecTV 125K net new subs, Dish Network 195K.

DirecTV net income $458M, Dish Network net income $169M.

Run DirecTV into the ground. Wow.

 

[BobMurdoch]

That will never happen. I'd go back to cable before I went back to Rupert. D* will get another bump from their NFL monopoly hammer in the 4th quarter.

I'm sure most of the affected people will "move" to an area where they can get their networks.

Bottom line, this will make me watch LESS broadcast networks, as I used to watch some shows from different time zones. Now I'll wind up on basic or pay cable networks instead. CHOKE on your victory broadcast networks..... Hopefully your greed will tick off enough rural congresseople to make them drop the bags of cash the NAB gives them in STFU money and rewrite the laws to make this whole mess moot...

 

[Greg Bimson]

It's beyond being about the law or who's legally entitled to what - it's about ethics and professionalism and as far as I'm concerned Murdoch just proved he doesn't have either. What a choice we have!

I'll call this a lesser of two evils. If it were about ethics and professionalism, Dish Network would have never found themselves in this jam in the first place.

It is pretty interesting that the CEO had taken the stand during this trial, and he assured the court he would do what it takes to qualify their subscriber base correctly. The Appeals Court noted that if anything, the qualifcation transgressions became worse since Mr. Ergen took the stand.

If a court cannot take the word of a company CEO...

 

[waltinvt]

I'll call this a lesser of two evils. If it were about ethics and professionalism, Dish Network would have never found themselves in this jam in the first place.

It is pretty interesting that the CEO had taken the stand during this trial, and he assured the court he would do what it takes to qualify their subscriber base correctly. The Appeals Court noted that if anything, the qualifcation transgressions became worse since Mr. Ergen took the stand.

If a court cannot take the word of a company CEO...

That's why I made the facetious statement of "what a choice we have", neither personifies the image of pious integrity as far as I'm concerned.

 

[srbond]

That will never happen. I'd go back to cable before I went back to Rupert. D* will get another bump from their NFL monopoly hammer in the 4th quarter.

I'm sure most of the affected people will "move" to an area where they can get their networks.

Bottom line, this will make me watch LESS broadcast networks, as I used to watch some shows from different time zones. Now I'll wind up on basic or pay cable networks instead. CHOKE on your victory broadcast networks..... Hopefully your greed will tick off enough rural congresseople to make them drop the bags of cash the NAB gives them in STFU money and rewrite the laws to make this whole mess moot...

That's how I feel... if I lose my DSN, I will not buy the locals.

I can live without ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX.

 

[jonsnow]

And now the broadcasters are trying to take even that limited choice away from our customers.

EXCUSE ME?

Dish did this to me and infringed on my rights at the beginning of the year when they took away my limited sample viewing of cable programing because of some behind the scenes family package contract which effected me, a customer not subscribing to this new package. Dish does NOT really care about customers with limited choice or else they would have enabled an opt in option to folks like me who like free previews. They DO NOT in any way consider people subscribing to their local packages important so why should they care if these people lose distants anyway.

 

[HDTVFanAtic]

And even if it is not available to me, I have a friend who will digitally record it for me... that's not illegal.

lol....Oh really?

 

[srbond]

lol....Oh really?

So it's illegal to record a show for a friend???

Give me a break.