[opendtv] Re: PR: Consumers in 39 Million U.S. Households Cannot Receive Complete Network Digital Service
- From: Dallas Axelrod <dallas_axelrod@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:45:05 -0700 (PDT)
John: In the case you cite, EchoStar relied on a third-party provider
(PrimeTime 24) to determine whether a consumer is eligible to receive a distant
network signal. DIRECTV relied on this same information. The National
Association of Broadcasters argued that Prime Time 24 was qualifying ineligible
consumers. So EchoStar brought the issue to the courts to determine whether
the National Association of Broadcasters claims were correct. This court case
has been on going for many years in many courts, which is not unusual for these
kind of complicated cases. DIRECTV settled their case years ago. I've heard
EchoStar say it was unfortunate that they relied on Prime Time 24 for this
information, but continue to exercise its legal rights to prevent its
subscribers from losing services as desired by the National Association of
Broadcasters. In the last five years, there has been no suits against EchoStar
or DIRECTV concerning the delivery of distant network signals.Consumers co
mplain
about the ILLR predictive model when they are denied the right to received a
distant network signal, but cannot receive a clear picture using an over the
air antenna. The model was created in the 1950s. In these years, consumer
didn't have high TV expectations. Today, consumers expect a clear crisp
digital picture from their TV provider whether it's cable, satellite, or
over-the-air. The problem is that the 1950s model tells consumers, especially
those in rural areas, that they can receive an adequate picture, but consumers
know that the picture is not watchable. This is the source of consumer
complaints. Consumers don't need Charlie Ergen to tell them that the
over-the-air picture they receive is crappy.
As for your search of another satellite TV company to support the interests of
satellite TV consumers. You need look no further than Cablevision's Voom.
They have come out in support of consumer's rights to receive a distant digital
network signal. You can't rely on DIRECTV to come out and support consumer
issues anymore because they are now owned by News Corp. DIRECTV supports all
the same issues as the National Association of Broadcasters.
The Digital Transition Coalition has an impressive list of members. It
includes American's for Tax Reform, Satellite Broadcasting & Communications
Association, Citizens Against Government Waste, Media Access Project, Public
Knowledge, Small Business Survival Committee, Frontiers of Freedom, and
EchoStar. In addition, the Consumer Electronics Association, the Cellular
Telecommunications & Internet Association, Cablevision's Rainbow DBS, and the
National Taxpayers Union all support the efforts of the DTC. It's all posted
on their website www.digitaltransitioncoalition.org.
There are only two groups that oppose the Coalition's efforts: The National
Association of Broadcasters and the National Cable Telecommunications
Association. It's not surprising that the NAB would oppose the Coalition's
efforts because they don't want to return any of their spectrum. In addition
to opposing the digital white area provision, the NAB have used their political
clout to keep spectrum out of the hands of our nation's first responders.
These are the people who save our lives in times of emergencies. It's not
surprising that the NCTA opposed any effort to free up the spectrum that would
help satellite TV deliver services to consumers. They are teaming up with the
NAB because they're getting crushed in the marketplace. Nevertheless, these
groups stand alone against the outcry for action by many others.
Lastly the pot shots you included throughout your reply really got under my
skin. As a former free-lance journalis, a low-power license owner, and now a
business owner of some video streaming technology linked with hollywood, it's
clear that you have the personal and business incentive to rail against the
satellite TV industry which seeks to offer consumers services that the
broadcasters are now not offering. Before you start discrediting everyone else
as having their own objectives, you should be more forthright with your
interests in this fight. You're just an extension of the NAB.
*****
[opendtv] Re: PR: Consumers in 39 Million U.S. Households Cannot Receive
Complete Network Digital Service
From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 21:04:25 -0700
Spin, spin, spin, spin, SPIN.Funny how you don't mention the discredited (by
the Judge) engineering --and I will assume it was done by the same folks that
did it this timearound -- that EchoStar offered in the Florida court case
brought by CBSthat EchoStar lost (summary judgment; no triable issues of fact)
last year.In that case, the "since 1999 argument" was also offered up, but
wasridiculed by the judge.Have you read the judge's decision? I would offer it
up, but my harddrivecrashed this week. I'll have to regain the document.You
may not know, but I do, that the predicted coverage for broadcaststations has
used methodology that was adopted by the FCC around the time Iwas born -- the
mid 1950's. It's been used for every subsequent radioservice, including TV,
and FM, and cellular radio, and ..., and ...There has been one change since
then: knife-edge diffraction, which the FCCaccepts on a case-by-case basis. I
also recognize that EchoStar acquiredthe rights to two differe
nt
databases to do knife-edge diffraction analysis,but apparently has not offered
up the results to anyone that I know of.Maybe that was because the judge in the
Florida case also ridiculed theefforts?There is ZERO MERIT to the argument that
consumers have been complainingabout this since 1999. What you mean to say is
that EchoStar viewers anddealers, inspired directly and indirectly by Charlie
Ergen, have beencomplaining about this since 1999. Funny that DirecTV viewers
don'tcomplain about it.Oh, yeah, that's right: DirecTV has never been adjudged
by a court as tohaving tried to spin the stations out of their affiliation
rights, nor hasDirecTV been adjudged by a court as having violated anti-trust
in violatingthe rights of broadcast stations.When EchoStar -- belatedly --
started in a small way to accede to theirlegal carriage requirements in 1999.
(A very good friend of mine once hadall of EchoStar's installation business in
a Southern California county; hegave it up when t
he fees
were reduced to below what he pays his installers,and the payments stopped
arriving even at that level.Echostar started to follow -- in a very de minimus
fashion -- their legalrequirements in 1999, and started stimulating for a
change in predictedcoverage then. IT WILL NOT BE CHANGED IN YOUR LIFETIME!So,
every broadcast engineer in the U.S. -- save for the few whores EchoStarhas
been able to compromise (sometimes in front of a judge) -- sees noreason to
change the method of predicting service contours because the onlypeople
complaining have no horse in the race: they're just trying tounfairly compete
with broadcasters, and not being successful with that, nowwant the rules
changed to their benefit.What's the SECOND satellite company whose engineers
complain about themethodology?As to what methodology the engineers followed,
I'm not so sure that I wouldbelieve the results, unless I was supervising the
work myself.So, the only way around is this simpleton's "greenroots" effort
.
Rotsaruck.Then, you offer up this canard: "According to Digital Transition
Coalition'swebsite, the group wants consumers across the country to be able to
receiveDTV service from local broadcasters immediately, and for the analog
spectrumused by the broadcasters returned by 2006."Yes, so now EchoStar and the
CEA (funders of the DTC) people who have madesome of the only dollars of profit
on DTV, now want the broadcasters bepunished because they (having not made a
penny on DTV, but spent billions)have a perceived interest in NOT MAXIMIZING
their signal level, even thoughan FCC rule gives them a "use it or lose it"
deadline on their maximumpower.My, what balls you guys have!Also, if the DTV
wants the analog spectrum returned by 2006, they wantsomething that they have
no right to, since clearly that spectrum by lawcannot be turned over until 2006
has elapsed.So, amigo, why should I forward a complaint to the FCC about the
map notincluding the Mexican-based Fox affiliate for San D
iego?
My, what balls youhave!Nothing you write proves anything except that you can
type and have a bareunderstanding of one party's viewpoints on this matter.I'll
let you know when I encounter the first broadcast engineer that thinksthat your
maps are conservative, or that the predicted service contourmethodology has
problems. Don't hold your breath: I don't suspect it willcome in this life:
I've been talking to engineers about these methods formore than 2 decades.John
WillkieP.S. Note: it doesn't take me a week (did you refer it to a committee?)
torespond to this drivel.-----Original Message-----From:
opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Dallas AxelrodSent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 2:14 PMTo:
opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [opendtv] Re: PR: Consumers in 39 Million U.S.
HouseholdsCannot Receive Complete Network Digital ServiceJohn:The information
you question like the methodology and the source of theinformation is posted on
the
www.iwantmyhdtv.com website. In addition, thecompany that did the work for
the coalition is also posted on the site. Iassume that you could contact those
engineers to get the answers to all yourquestions.However I'd you'd just be
told that the maps were made using the samemethodology used by the FCC to
determine whether a consumer is served by anover the air broadcaster. As you
may or may not know, consumers have beencomplaining about the accuracy of these
predicted models since 1999. Thesatellite TV companies keep complaining that
the methodology should beupdated to take into account modern consumer
expectations, but thebroadcasters remain firm in their view that the
methodology is accurate.According to Digital Transition Coalition's website,
the group wantsconsumers across the country to be able to receive DTV service
from localbroadcasters immediately, and for the analog spectrum used by
thebroadcasters returned by 2006.The conclusion is that the maps and figures
prov
ided by
this group areprobably on the conservative side, especially since they're used
amethodology supported by the National Association of Broadcasters and usedby
the FCC. The individuals who posted complaints about the accuracy shoulddirect
there complaints to the FCC rather than lodge their complaints at theDigital
Transition Coalition. It just further proves that the broadcastersare dragging
their feet in making DTV service available.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
