You still can't charge for services not rendered. Secondly it is considered fraud on Dishes part by not specificly informing new customers that there was a court case that could cause them to loose the DVR function. There is one thing that trumps everything. That is called the "implied warranty". If I sell you a car, it should transport you. If I sell you a stereo, it should play music. Etc... Etc.. So if I sell you a DVR, it should function. The arguement about the licensing not being paid for is moot for two reasons. First, by Dishes own words they charge you more for a dvr receiver. So licensing fees are taken in the sale of that receiver to the customer. At least that is how it is supposed to work. Are computers being shut down for not paying licensing fees? How many checks have we wrote to Microsoft, or Apple so we can use our computers year after year? I havn't wrote a dime. The licensing was figured into the price of the computer. I am not continueing to pay licensing in spite of the use on the internet. The DVR thing is the same. A customer pays a higher price for a functioning DVR as opposed to a standard receiver. How many DVRs would they sell telling people that they cost more but won't work? If people based their decision to go with Dish as opposed to Direct because of the DVR thing. Those people that subbed because of the DVR function would have a case to tell Dish to take their ETF and shove it. Implided warranty overcome many a small print. Have a great day!
Last edited:
This is where this case leads to, a total monopoly of a modern technology that's already in the public domain. Only when their so called patents expire would the world have a dvr again.
).
