Then enjoy not having it. It's not Charlie, but the studios and their DRM efforts.
I agree.
Then enjoy not having it. It's not Charlie, but the studios and their DRM efforts.
I am sure tired of hearing this excuse. Charlie has a responsibility here. He is always talking about fighting to bring value to his customers. Well value is not just measured in price, but in ...value. Value like telling us during his chats that it's not him it's the studios. Value like encouraging his customers to call the studios and complain about the DRM. Value like taking a stand and telling the studios his customers don't want DRM and Dish won't carry their PPV and premium channels if DRM is attached. And by the way his DVR customers want to be able to make an archive copy of something that they can playback later without having to circumvent US Federal Law to do so. Anything but just caving on the issue without a word.Then enjoy not having it. It's not Charlie, but the studios and their DRM efforts.
Wouldn't the handshake be done through the phone line, not the satellite dish?
Fitzie
KAB said:Then enjoy not having it. It's not Charlie, but the studios and their DRM efforts.
Really? Well studios don't make squat without distribution and distribution is what Charlie does. If the distributors said "no" to the studio's extortion, they'd buckle very quickly.I agree.
Well said Pepper.I am sure tired of hearing this excuse. Charlie has a responsibility here. He is always talking about fighting to bring value to his customers. Well value is not just measured in price, but in ...value. Value like telling us during his chats that it's not him it's the studios. Value like encouraging his customers to call the studios and complain about the DRM. Value like taking a stand and telling the studios his customers don't want DRM and Dish won't carry their PPV and premium channels if DRM is attached. And by the way his DVR customers want to be able to make an archive copy of something that they can playback later without having to circumvent US Federal Law to do so. Anything but just caving on the issue without a word.
It IS Charlie, if he does nothing, he's an accomplice.
[this rant may actually be more appropriate to the general DRM issue on PPVs and Premiums but it fits this situation too]
Oh for crying out loud!It's hard to complain. We haven't really purchased the content. HBO is more like a rental. You drop HBO and you lose access.
At least we can still make permanent archivals to DVD.
The move limit has been lifted, albeit a few bugs.
It is a fact:I wouldn't be too sure about this yet either. Some of the CSR's that seemed to know more than your average 'out-of-the-country' CSR's seem to think that there is still a '3 receiver limit.' What this means is anyone's guess. It could be BS and probably is, it could also mean that you can only have up to three receivers tied to a household code, or it could mean that if you get 3 different household codes you are going to be forced to format. Personally I am hoping for the first option as I now have 1.8 terrabytes of external HD's slaved to my dish receivers.
Has anyone done the household code reset thing three times yet? It would be really nice to rule this one out.
It is a fact:
http://www.satelliteguys.us/1329439-post38.html
He corrected himself later...external hard drives.
I've moved between my 622 and 722 six or seven times. I don't have three receivers, so all I can say is what I've said. Both units have the same codes and all is well for me.What is a fact? Go ahead and be the guinea pig then please. Get more than three receivers in your house and move some HD"s around (I know, probably unlikely for most of us) or get your household code reset a bunch of times and tell us what happens. Or get a couple of broken receivers replaced and see if your external HD's still work. I see that maybe my post was a bit vague, I know that you can move your drives back and forth more than three times with two receivers but I was wondering what would happen in other extreme circumstances.
Oh for crying out loud!
No, it's not hard to complain at all. It's called "Fair Use" and being entitled to make copies for personal use.
We had it and they didn't like it but they put up with it as long as the quality of the copy was not as good as the original.
Now that the technologically exists to make decent quality copies, they've decided we can't be trusted with "Fair Use" and they're taking it away or relegating it to copies that, relatively speaking, look like crap.
A Moral Wrong is not a Civil Right.