Got reply from FCC

[FreddyvsJasonvsAsh]

this is what was said and then I'll show you the reply

Dear Mr. Adelstein,

My name is Brian and I have a couple questions regarding HDTV. My first
question is are DBS and cable companies allowed to advertise HD channels
if they are not really HD? My next question is if they are not allowed
to advertise HD when it really isn't, can legal action be taking to have
them readdress the issue? The reason I'm asking this is because I'm with
Dish Network and they are advertising HD but they are really HD-Lite. If
I'm correct the meaning of HD is 1280x720p and 1920x1080i and not
1280x1080i. I'm trying to find this out as many people are being
deprived of "True HD" and I think the FCC needs to really look into this
more. I really hope you can take some interest in this.

~Brian Wenzloff

now this below is the reply I got today.......

Thank you for contacting the Federal Communications Commission.

I address your concerns in your order.

The FCC's oversight of DBS and cable companies does not extend to their
"advertising". The Federal Trade Commission (FTC at www.ftc.gov) has
oversight of "business practices" of companies; which includes
false/deceptive advertising.

As a general rule, most issues can be taken to court; therefore, you may
wish to consult an attorney.

A visit to this site (http://www.dtv.gov/) should help provide you with
additional information.

It is generally understood that use any one of the following formats
would constitute High Definition TV (HDTV) formatting.

720p - 1280x720 pixels progressive
1080i - 1920x1080 pixels interlaced
1080p - 1920x1080 pixels progressive

Hope this helps.

C. Howell
FCC/Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Information Access & Privacy Office
202-418-1569

 

[mcdeeee]

Looks like the FTC is your next stop.

 

[FreddyvsJasonvsAsh]

well I had already put in a complaint with FTC last week

 

[SRW1000]

Well, even though the FCC has no control over DBS and cable operators, it is somewhat reassuring that they are applying the higher standard resolutions to define HD.

That's worth something.

Scott

 

[CPanther95]

The key is "generally understood".

That definition will eventually change if the market has accepted other formats for very long.

 

[spindoctor]

It is generally understood that use any one of the following formats
would constitute High Definition TV (HDTV) formatting.
720p - 1280x720 pixels progressive
1080i - 1920x1080 pixels interlaced
1080p - 1920x1080 pixels progressive
Hope this helps.
C. Howell
FCC/Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Information Access & Privacy Office
202-418-1569

freddyvsjason great job on your effort

at least they agreed to what constitutes a HDTV format.

next lets all take the effort one more step to FCC and make D* pay for the deceptive

misunderstanding.....

ohhh this is going to be good.

 

[FreddyvsJasonvsAsh]

Thank you

 

[iKramerica]

The key is "generally understood".
That definition will eventually change if the market has accepted other formats for very long.

That's exactly some of us who only have 480p TVs are still willing to support the good fight. If allowed to do this for too long, "HD" providers will never have to switch back, even at a time when most consumers DO have 720p or 1080i/p TV sets.

And the key to "generally understood" is that if you are providing something else, you MUST BE EXPLICIT, because the customer does not "generally understand" that you are not providing them with what you think they are providing them.

It is not a surprise that the FCC is passing the buck since you discussed false advertising. You might respond back to them though RE: retransmission of over the air networks and cite the laws they inforce regarding that aspects. The FCC does have a say in whether network retransmission can be downgraded either via high compression or lower resolution or both. The law says Dish and DirecTV can't do such a thing, but they do it anyway. And the FCC can enforce that part...

 

[FreddyvsJasonvsAsh]

well if you look I did state that they show HD at 1280x1080i.....when it's suppose to be one of the 3 listed....they still passed the buck

 

[Stacy A]

I still say at some point in the future, going the full resolution will be considered a "selling point" and the natural law of competition will kick in. One of the DBS companies will be the first to offer "full HD resolution" in order to entice new subscribers.

 

[SimpleSimon]

The key is "generally understood".

That definition will eventually change if the market has accepted other formats for very long.

Which is why this has to be acted upon NOW.

 

[iKramerica]

Exactly. Once it is "generally understood" that HD can mean any damn thing, then all is lost.

Everyone must remember, the consumer and taxpayer is paying a huge price for the, in my mind, silly transition to HD (when 480p or 575p would have been fine for most of us). But since it's a done deal, we better get what we are freaking paying for. Period.

 

[BigFella]

I still say at some point in the future, going the full resolution will be considered a "selling point" and the natural law of competition will kick in. One of the DBS companies will be the first to offer "full HD resolution" in order to entice new subscribers.

I'm with Stacy on this. Calling the lawyers in will only make the lawyers rich. Let the free enterprise system run its course. Survival of the fittest. Available bandwidth and encoding technologies just aren't here yet, but will be eventually.

 

[Carl B]

I still say at some point in the future, going the full resolution will be considered a "selling point" and the natural law of competition will kick in. One of the DBS companies will be the first to offer "full HD resolution" in order to entice new subscribers.

Right, and for another $5/month Premium HD fee!

 

[Sarang]

The key is "generally understood".
That definition will eventually change if the market has accepted other formats for very long.

Yeah and does ANYONE here honestly want to tolerate 4:3 again, in HD this time? I know I don't and that's about what 1280x1080i is. I want 4:3 to DIE and stay dead. It use to be practical for TV but now it's served it's purpose.

 

[David D.]

When you are paying for HD and do not receive it, is this not fraud?

Calling the lawyers in will only make the lawyers rich.

When you are paying for HD and do not receive it, is this not fraud?

There must be lawyers reading these posts, are there grounds for a class action lawsuit?

I believe at the very least, a call to our State Attorney General's office is in order!

 

[BrianMis]

I still say at some point in the future, going the full resolution will be considered a "selling point" and the natural law of competition will kick in. One of the DBS companies will be the first to offer "full HD resolution" in order to entice new subscribers.

Dish is doing this now, All the core HDPak channels are still being sent in their full native formats and are not being down converted. Also since being on Dish only 3 of the Voom channels have been converted to 1280x1080i. Also I think the Voom issue will be resolved sometime in the near future.