Slashdot Mirror
DirecTV to Pursue Pirates
Trinity-Infinity writes "This story from CNNfn details DirecTV's & Hughes Electronics' plans to eliminate the piracy of their signals through a direct-mail campaign. Their source for creating their list of who to mail letters to? Searching bootlegging operations the feds have already busted. It is interesting that as many as 1 million people may be pirating, in comparison to DirecTV's 10 million paying customers." Ya know, I really want to pirate DirecTV, but not to get all the channels... just to get a damn FOX affiliate over my dish so I could use my DirecTivo for The Family Guy and That 70s Show. Is that to much to ask? I already pay for HBO and Sci-Fi channel. Anyway, there's definitely going to be a lot more cracking down on pirated dish stuff: they are getting crazy with the protective measures.
Because not enough people would pay for Outdoor Life Network, or other channels with smaller targets. It's a form of Revenue Sharing, the people paying for ESPN are helping support 24 hour Lawn & Gardening.
Almost everybody I know who watches TV has
some kind of cracked system for it. My problem
with this is that *I* can't make myself pay
for something that I know is widely available for free, so I basically do without TV.
If the situation were that everybody really and
truly paid, instead of the "H-Card/PC" situation
I see everywhere, I might be able to justify
subscribing.
This is one case where widespread "piracy" has caused me to evaluate a service as not being worth paying for! (If all my neighbors get the
service for free and take it for granted, I do
not wish to be a chump and pay for it.)
If I paid for satellite tv, I would definitely become the only person I know, and I know plenty,
who pays.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I'd pirate Directv too, but I don't have a ship and I can't sail. And I don't have a TV. No really, this "pirate" business is starting to get on my nerves. Why the hell they're calling US pirates? They're the ones who rip us off with high rates, crappy content, bad customer support and questionable service...
There's no reason to believe this is any different from the BSA mailings featured a while ago: They're fishing. No crime in sending a nasty letter, no legal fees or protracted court battle. I suspect the direct mail piece will essentially say: we know you're up to something, ya no-good dirty pirate, but if you go ahead and subscribe to our service right away we won't bother to investigate you...
If, as the article suggests, they've had patchy success prosecuting the big middlemen operations, how the hell likely are they to succeed in running down the a million diffuse and unfederated end-users? Far as I know class action suits only go one way, and this ain't it, meaning they'd have to prosecute each user individually, and what are they likely to get? A back bill for a few years' service at best? Tell me it could come even close to covering the staggering legal fees.
They're just beating the bushes, hoping to scare some people into subscribing. Note that in the final analysis, they don't gain anything if a pirate simply gives up on stealing the signal. They either need to get retroactive compensation or get them to sign up.
Take a look at the stock graph in the article: that's your whole story. Just trying to prop up sagging revenue. The real question is... just how did they get those lists of names? If they were part of a separate case, under what jurisdiction were those names released to DirecTeeVee?
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
I can understand the "just the channels I want" argument, but it has been addressed elsewhere. If the time comes when it is available, you will probably have to pay a premium for them because you are breaking up a package offered by the studios to the broadcasting companies. (see other posts above for more).
Overall, though, comperable packages are still cheaper than cable (about $10/month cheaper here). Most times, you can get a deal for a free dish and receiver in exchange for a year contract. I have had DirecTV for 2 years now and I must say that I am extremely satisfied with their service and pricing. Time Warner Cable (as most cable companies), treats their customers as a commodity. They think that they are the only game in town. They didnt ask me why I was discontinuing my service, but it sure didnt stop them from calling me once a month for the next year; and they still send me snailmail.
In order for DirecTV/UBS/etc to be able to break the cable monopoly, they need to be supported. Personally, I dont think very highly of people pirating DirecTV because it really does harm them in more ways than just their revenue stream. Once their user base reaches a number that the camble companies are unable to ignore, you will start to see competition in the market. Until then, DirecTV is still cheaper, more reliable, and has more package options.
The ivory tower has never had to reach so h
If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.
Isn't this what everybody's been asking for? We've asked companies to stop copy protecting their "intellectual property" at the cost of convenience to ordinary consumers, and go after actual pirates instead, and it looks like this is what they doing.
I 'steal' my DTV (Im canadian) Cause I can! The signal is there, I have the tools and the knowledge to do it, so I do it. That should be the catch, a reward for smart people: If your smart enough to do it yourself, you can have it for free. Otherwise, pay the huge company more money that they really don't need. All these Joe nobody's buying $300 cards from other 'pirates' is whats wrong. These pirates are reselling the service, and thats what I have a problem with.
Find Escorts, Strippers, Massage Parlours, Swingers
Who doesn't know someone who got cable for free and "forgot" to tell the cable company?
That said, now that there are 3 choices for television programming (cable, air, satellite) for many people they can no longer use the excuse that they are just fighting the man.
There is finally at least the hope of competition in this long-time monopoly. Honestly, I don't know why this is news worthy of a Slashdot post, unless theft and Slashdot are somehow linked.
Moderate me down if you must.
personal attacks hurt, especially when deserved
I personally wonder where they get these stats...Big software companies always attribute their losses to piracy, what's to stop them from saying "We had 30% less profit this month, our software sucks, but that can't be it, must be piracy" No one's there to stop them from saying that or proving them wrong. Couldn't DirecTV pull a similar stunt in an attempt to explain 1M customers leaving or falling 1M customers short of their expectations(or at least bloat their piracy numbers a bit)?
the DSS satellites beam the digital signal to practically every square foot of land in the united states of america. last time i checked, it has never been illegal to intercept a signal that is being delivered to your property.
so what exactly is being stolen here?? let's see, they broadcast a signal at me that i did not ask for. i intercept the signal and do what i will with it. if you pay some company, they will furnish you with equipment which makes it easier to use the signal (that is being beamed at you, with or without your consent).
does this "crackdown" seem ludicrious to anyone else? how do you steal what you are being beamed for free?
-inq
Is paying DirecTV for usage of their system too much to ask? Nobody really needs all those channels. People generally only get DirecTV for a couple of channels they wouldn't otherwise be able to get in their area. If DirecTV can offer these programs you want to watch in a better way than you can see them now, why not just pay for the service?
IMO Its really damaging to the Geek community to have people who want to pirate DirecTV yelling in chorus with the people who think the DMCA is evil and corporations are trying to strip us of fair use, etc. Just paints us as an unruly mob that wants everything for free.
And, before anyone posts the 'well they broadcast their signal onto my property' defense, I don't buy into that and never will. The fact that these same people would be outraged if they were videotaped and/or voice recorded if they walked by my property (despite the fact that they are reflecting light and broadcasting sound waves onto my property) just makes it more ridiculous.
If direct TV would just offer channels on an individual basis at a reasonable cost less people would pirate it. There are only about 20 channels I ever watch but to get them all I have to get the Super Duper Bazzillion Channels pack. Why can't they just offer the channels I want. Also for things like the Tour De France I would have gladly paid for Outdoor Life Network for 3 weeks to have that event but to get that I needed to buy 50+ extra channels. Not worth it in my opinion. Any thoughts on why they can't sell "per channel?"
Sure, DirecTV has every right to make money. What they seem to forget is that they have every right to lose it, too. If they want to make sure that only paying customers can decode their signals, sending out nastygrams and junk mail isn't going to do it. Making it illegal to own a cell phone scanner isn't going to stop it, nor will outlawing radar detectors stop people from exceeding the speed limit.
Pure legislation is very often the least effective means to acheiving a goal. Which is more effective: leaving your house unlocked and trusting to the illegality of theft or installing deadbolts on your doors? Printing money on typing paper and hoping that nobody counterfeits it (after all, that would be -gasp- illegal!) or using cotton paper and any number of tricks to make forgery as difficult as possible?
Obviously, there are many cases where both laws and preventative measures are necessary (murder comes to mind), but why should that include ensuring a corporation a steady source of income?
I would infinitely rather that my cell phone service put money into keeping the signal encrypted and private than have them spend it on lobbying and have to depend on some flimsy law that supposedly has my best interests at heart. Law can and will be twisted to serve any purpose and is written by people who haven't got a clue, while a technical fix to a technical problem is more effective, usually costs less (when you consider money spent on enforcement of the new law), and adds to the knowledge in that field. How much money have the RIAA/MPAA spent on their wars, and just how effective have they been? The RIAA's attempt at CD copy-protection may be nasty, but it's a heck of a lot more effective than what they've been up to till now.
Dyolf Knip
I'm sure he, and a good many others, would be quite happy to pay for the service of getting a certain network.
The problem is that DirectTV WON'T SELL IT TO THEM, not that they won't pay for it. Or maybe CAN'T SELL IT TO THEM, rather than they won't pay.
Why is this? Because some pinhead out of the area decided that a "local affiliate" covers them. In many cases, this is true. In many others, this is not at all true. But no amount of telling anyone that this doesn't work will change anyone's mind.. you'd have to get the denier to move to the site before they'd acknowledge that yes, indeed, there is a lack of coverage. What is needed is an easy (but hard to fake) means of showing a lack of coverage, short of buying some bozo plane tickets, paying for his hotel and rental car so he can waltz around for a couple minutes with a strength meter.
What's particularly galling is knowing that folks the next county over, WHO ARE CLOSER TO THE TRANSMITTER SITE (and in the field pattern, yes) are in another artificial zone and can get the channels you are not allowed to get.
Give a person a chance to be honest, and most times he'll be honest. But make it illegal for him to do what others just like him can do, and then maybe you better hope he's a saint.
--
The Coward