Me too...Jim5506 said:I changed the wording of the e-mail to match my circumstance. If they all say the same thing, they will be ignored. Mix it up a bit.
Me too...Jim5506 said:I changed the wording of the e-mail to match my circumstance. If they all say the same thing, they will be ignored. Mix it up a bit.
Jim5506 said:I changed the wording of the e-mail to match my circumstance. If they all say the same thing, they will be ignored. Mix it up a bit.
UPDATE - DISTANT NETWORK CHANNEL ALERT - UPDATE
The Special Retailer Chat on Channel 999 has been changed to Tuesday, July 25th at 12PM ET. Please tune in for important information from DISH Network. We need your help in Washington
Uh, if the theory holds, a court of law will force Dish Network to stop delivering distants.Chris Walker said:My Distants go, Dish loses my $100 a month. Hope it's worth it to them, I get them 100% legally. That is straight Bullsh!t if they cut off people with WAIVERS, if there are cutoffs it better to be to truly questionable subs and not legit ones.
Greg Bimson said:So, now let me make sure of your issue. If the court issues an injunction, you would still want Dish Network to break the law and deliver you distants?
That is because your fears are valid; they are already codified into law. Think about it:Scott Greczkowski said:One of my fears is if Distants are gone from Dish then the broadcasters will find a way in the future to get them off of DirecTV and the only network they will have is FOX.
Greg Bimson said:If the court issues an injunction, you would still want Dish Network to break the law and deliver you distants?
Isn't breaking the law what put Dish Network in this situation? Yet you are now advocating it? You'd want to tank Dish Network?Iceberg said:If I legally have them via waivers-yes
If I legally have them because I live in an area that Dish doesn't have locals yet and I qualify for distants because I am outside of grade b-yes
Greg Bimson said:Isn't breaking the law what put Dish Network in this situation? Yet you are now advocating it? You'd want to tank Dish Network?
The way the law is written, the only remedy for the "willful infringement" is to permanently injunct use of distant networks. So are you insisting the court turns a blind eye? So are you insisting the court start legislating from the bench, becoming an activist court?pdxsam said:So as Iceberg said if customers have valid and legal waivers they should not lose DNS. It's not wanting to tank Dish, it's just what's correct legally.
Greg Bimson said:The way the law is written, the only remedy for the "willful infringement" is to permanently injunct use of distant networks. So are you insisting the court turns a blind eye? So are you insisting the court start legislating from the bench, becoming an activist court?
The rules for the license are simple. If the rules are blatantly violated, the ONLY course of action for the courts is to cut-off distant service to everyone.
vurbano said:Im going to be really unpopular if I state my views on this. But DNS needs to be turned off to be fair to everyone. The poor Joe just inside the grade B contour never qualified for DNS eventhough the reception sucked yet some neighbor a few yards away did qualify? Its always been an unfair system with thousands lying about where they live inorder to get DNS. D* is turning it off and E* will have to as well. Time for those pristine NY and LA feeds to go bye bye. Time to suffer equaly like everyone else with the local affialiate's crappy multicast ridden crap. Get over it. No petition is going to change it. Soon you'll have HDLIL coverage by Sat anyway.
Limited time offer