EchoStar Battle Rages On

[Scott Greczkowski]

EchoStar Battle Rages On
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 12/1/2006 9:50:00 AM
http://www.broadcastingcable.com

With Dec. 1 the court-ordered deadline for EchoStar to cut off distant
TV network signals to 850,000 subs, the battle between broadcasters and
the satellite company raged.

The National Association of Broadcasters saw EchoStar's contract for
satellite capacity with National Programming Service, which delivers
local station signals to its customers, as a way to circumvent the
court's Oct. 20 injunction, calling it "flagrant contempt" for the
permanent injunction.

NAB also pointed out that the U.S.Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit
had denied EchoStar's motion to stay the injunction. A Florida court had
earlier also turned down an appeal of the injunction.

We're hopeful the courts recognize this latest stunt for what it is: a
serial copyright abuser's refusal to comply with numerous court verdicts
and federal statutes that preserve the enduring value of local
broadcasting," said NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton.

EchoStar shot back in a statement: " "EchoStar has worked diligently to
make sure consumers have a choice of distant network signals. We reached
a $100 million settlement that was accepted and later rejected by the
broadcasters, yet they continue to bully consumers and the courts.

"We are hopeful the courts will see through the Fox Network-led
coalition of broadcasters, whose real intention is to deny consumers
their freedom of choice and leave the Fox-owned DirecTV as a monopoly
for distant networks."

Fox's DirecTV is looking to woo the EchoStar subscribers who will
suddenly not be able to get their local stations.

The injunction stemmed from the court's conclusion that EchoStar could
not effectively distinguish between subs eligible to receive a distant
network affiliate and those who could receive an acceptable local signal
of that same network. EchoStar settled with almost all the stations, but
that did not dissuade the court. It also sought help from Congress, and
a bill was crafted that would have effectively blocked the injunction,
but no action was taken before the Thanksgiving break, which isn't over
until next week.

 

[technoguy]

Networks Leaving No EchoStar Stone Unturned

More of this Soap Opera !!

It seems the networks are leaving nothing to chance in their court filings for an Emergency Show Cause Order seeking to have EchoStar declared in contempt of court for leasing satellite space to NPS. Here is the networks latest court filing:

"In the alternative to their Emergency Motion for Order to Show Cause, Plaintiffs hereby move for an Order making explicit—although there can be no good faith doubt about the matter—that the Permanent Injunction bars EchoStar from leasing or otherwise making available its satellite facilities for retransmission of distant network stations by third parties to EchoStar customers. The grounds for this Motion are set forth in Plaintiffs Supplemental Memorandum filed today, which contains both plaintiffs reply in support of their Emergency Motion for an Order to Show Cause and their memorandum of points and authorities in support of this motion."

The court filings went on to list several exhibits supposedly used to show links between EchoStar and National Programming Service. NPS filed paperwork with the court advising the court that they too would have attorneys representing their interests in this case appearing in Florida before the judge.

Stay tuned to the Transmitter News for more updates as they become available

 

[cybertrip]

*Turns up Star Wars - Duel of the Fates music

 

[richiephx]

This whole saga is truly amazing to me. Here are supposedly intelligent adults battling over such stupidity as television channels that, in my opinion, provides worthless crap to the viewer. What a waste of money. Just think what could be accomplished if the parties involved funneled their energies into something positive. It just supports my position to NOT watch network programming.

 

[Smith P.]

They're fighting for MONEY ! Big money - millions and millions.

 

[cybertrip]

They're fighting for MONEY ! Big money - millions and millions.

You would think. But with this ruling aren't the networks ultimately losing money?

 

[DISH_NC]

This is truly getting so ridiculous... With most shows being released on DVD and my subscription to Netflix, apart from Sports, there is no compelling reason to watch the networks.

I get the benefits of NO commercials and can watch the shows at my leisure... May not be in HD, but still good enough for me (especially considering I lost CBS-HD and my OTA of CBS-HD here is poor).

 

[Hall]

You would think. But with this ruling aren't the networks ultimately losing money?

The networks are fighting for, or representing, their local affiliates. It does no good for me, in Dayton OH, to watch CBS out of New York City when it comes to advertisers (local, at least). My local CBS gets paid by their advertisers based on the # of viewers and if I'm watching an out-of-network CBS, that's one less viewer.

 

[Jordan420]

They're fighting for MONEY ! Big money - millions and millions.

They had money but they turned it down

EchoStar shot back in a statement: " "EchoStar has worked diligently to
make sure consumers have a choice of distant network signals. We reached
a $100 million settlement that was accepted and later rejected by the
broadcasters, yet they continue to bully consumers and the courts.

$100 million is a lot of money, & in my opnion the broadcasters really lost out, they should have taken the cash.

Most networks are putting their shows online for free or for a small fee, more & more people are using dvrs, DVD's, television comercials are just not reaching nearly as many people as they were 6 or 7 years ago

 

[cybertrip]

The networks are fighting for, or representing, their local affiliates. It does no good for me, in Dayton OH, to watch CBS out of New York City when it comes to advertisers (local, at least). My local CBS gets paid by their advertisers based on the # of viewers and if I'm watching an out-of-network CBS, that's one less viewer.

That makes sense. However, most of the people with DNS are the ones that could never get their local affiliated station to begin with. IMO, I think everyone should get the two major cities just like those with movie packages get both East and West feeds. I do question some times why I get LA locals instead of Bakersfield locals but it doesn't really bug me and I don't feel affected nore do I have an RV. But I do support a customers freedom of choice.

 

[WiCkeDuDe]

Most all the networks were fine with settling for a good sum of money, $100 million. The 25 fox stations controlled by Rupert were the only ones that would not settle. It is interesting the merger rumors are now coming back up.

 

[Hall]

That makes sense. However, most of the people with DNS are the ones that could never get their local affiliated station to begin with.

Those people were allowed to get distants and Dish was allowed to supply it to them, but Dish ignored the restriction and let customers who weren't eligible have it.

 

[cybertrip]

Those people were allowed to get distants and Dish was allowed to supply it to them, but Dish ignored the restriction and let customers who weren't eligible have it.

True, however, the courts are going a little bit far by denying E* from transmitting any DNS'. Simply fining them and forcing a change in conduct and possibly a law suit between the stations/echostar or a settlement would've been better in the interest of the customers.

 

[n0qcu]

True, however, the courts are going a little bit far by denying E* from transmitting any DNS'. Simply fining them and forcing a change in conduct and possibly a law suit between the stations/echostar or a settlement would've been better in the interest of the customers.

Unfortunatly the punishment was written into the law and the option available was to ban E* from selling DNS.

 

[Hall]

True, however, the courts are going a little bit far by denying E* from transmitting any DNS'. Simply fining them and forcing a change in conduct and possibly a law suit between the stations/echostar or a settlement would've been better in the interest of the customers.

When Dish continued to ignore the ruling, why would the judge "trust" that Dish would only provide DNS to those truly eligible ?? Repeatedly telling Dish they're in violation and Dish ignoring that gives an indication of what would happen if the courts attempted to "force a change in conduct". Finally, the law is written in the interests of the TV stations and networks, not the consumers. I do think there should be laws that are in the best interest of consumers, believe it or not, but that's simply not the law that's at issue here. Of course, the current law and any consumer-friendly law couldn't conflict with one another either.

 

[cybertrip]

When Dish continued to ignore the ruling, why would the judge "trust" that Dish would only provide DNS to those truly eligible ?? Repeatedly telling Dish they're in violation and Dish ignoring that gives an indication of what would happen if the courts attempted to "force a change in conduct". Finally, the law is written in the interests of the TV stations and networks, not the consumers. I do think there should be laws that are in the best interest of consumers, believe it or not, but that's simply not the law that's at issue here. Of course, the current law and any consumer-friendly law couldn't conflict with one another either.

I agree. That's what bugs me about contracts. If I have a contract and the company stops offering a service that is solely the reason I have gone with that company then I deserve to have the contract voided without penalty. There are still a few options for DNS but the customer may suffer from extended costs of switching to that option.

 

[JohnH]

Well, the law allows more people to get network affiliates that they could not previously get.

 

[Hall]

If I have a contract and the company stops offering a service that is solely the reason I have gone with that company then I deserve to have the contract voided without penalty.

For the sake of argument, let's say you had Dish service only for DNS. As of Dec 1, I believe without question that you could end your commitment with Dish as they're no longer legally allowed to offer you this service. Oh, you also were subscribed to say Top 120 too ?? Hmmmm, you'll have a hard time proving you only went with E* for DNS in that case....

 

[cybertrip]

For the sake of argument, let's say you had Dish service only for DNS. As of Dec 1, I believe without question that you could end your commitment with Dish as they're no longer legally allowed to offer you this service. Oh, you also were subscribed to say Top 120 too ?? Hmmmm, you'll have a hard time proving you only went with E* for DNS in that case....

and there lies the problem.

 

[Hall]

I'm confused by your posts now..... I guess in your mind you should be allowed to speed and run stop lights because if you don't, you'll be late for work. Laws be damned.