? why would you "block" at the STB an encrypted channel? "Defense in depth" is not a concept that is often seen used in cable ca systems. Usually, they do the minimum, and only then in the breach. John Willkie -----Original Message----- >From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx> >Sent: Jun 9, 2008 6:12 AM >To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [opendtv] Re: News: The Real Fight Over Fake News > >At 10:10 AM -0400 6/8/08, Adam Goldberg wrote: >> > With digital cable the cable company can enable/disable channels on >>> an individual basis via the STB - a critical part of the two-way >> >>Channel authorizations have NOTHING to do with the two-way 'agreement' (if >>there is one). > >You may be correct. The blocking may occur at the head end when you >request an encrypted channel. But the result is the same - you will >get a screen that asks you to contact your service provider to >authorize this channel. I'm not sure where these screens are >generated 9at the head end or in my cable box). Any TV with built-in >two way capability will need to do the same thing. > >>Without expressing an opinion on a la carte, I haven't heard this argument >>against it. What they argue, I think, is that channels are cheaper in >>bundles (for them, and they pass the savings on to you). > >Actually I have heard both. The analog problem is well know, and the >FCC has recognized that blocking individual analog channels is not >technically feasible for analog cable ready TVs. The argument that >you cite is being used by DBS and the cable industry despite the fact >that it is largely untrue. What they are really saying - which may or >may not be true - is that subscriber fees would likely go up >significantly if the congloms could not get paid for every extended >basic subscriber. For example, if ESPN suddenly lost half of the >subscribers who are currently paying about $3.70 per month, they >would probably raise the subscriber fee on those who want ESPN. > >IMHO this argument only holds water for a limited number of channels. >For the vast majority I believe the subscriber fees would go away, to >prevent a sudden contraction in the total number of homes where that >channel is available. > >The best evidence to support this is that companies are bidding up >the price to be seen on Freeview, knowing that they must make up >these carriage costs via advertising revenue. > >Regards >Craig > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.