Slashdot Mirror
Comcast in Court, AT&T Gets Greedy
raindr writes "The Detroit News has this article on how comcast is going after people with modified Cable TV boxes.These fines (170k) seem a bit much to me." They apparantly send out a "bullet" to deactivate modded boxes. In other coax news,Shynedog writes "Boston.com is running a story about AT&T broadband users in the Northeast who are complaining about the unfair price hike that has been imposed on subscribers who own their own modems.
It the wake of recent customer complaints, AT&T has started offering coupons to offset the monthly increase, but only for the next six months."
...they might be able to scare a good amount of would be theaves off...
..maybe itll just trample our rights...
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
1. Steal
2. Get caught
3. Get punished
Yeah sounds about right.
Who run Barter Town?
...the cable companies claim that these illegal boxes actually degrade the quality for all becuase it introduces resistance to the line for everyone else making all these "bad guys" into "your enemy too" type targets... it sick
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
I'd recommend anyone who is offended by the tactics of cable companies to simply quit subscribing to cable at all.
When we watch tv we are wasting time when we could be doing something productive, and if you want good entertainment you can always rent a movie. Tv is full of ads, many of which are from the large, rich, dmca loving companies that we all dispise. Why would anyone want to PAY to watch disney, or NBC, or warner? By doing that we are simply funding the companies that are destroying all our freedom. Tv is also controlled by americans, and I've seen my local canadian television go downhill when faced against the behemoth of american corporate television. Kids are being brainwashed and having their brains rot from imported japanese tv such as pokemon, which are basically hallucinogenic sessions.
I say pull the cable plug out for good, we no longer need to be mindless zombies of the media.
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
(ok, it's the ISDN/128K user in me that talks now)
"Theft of cable TV costs the industry an estimated $6 billion a year, according to the National Cable Television Association."
So they are suing them for 170,000 each.. at that rate there is only roughly a little more then 35,000 people in the US stealing cable. Doesn't seem like very many people to be worried about.. and thats spread out across the whole US.. wonder if those stats include Sat Theft too?
I don't think AT&T has gotten greedy yet. They provide me with a 1.5 Megabit downstream and 384 Kilabit upstream 24 hours a day / 7 days a week. To get this kind of link with a DSL line, the prices start around $80 a month in my area, and AT&T is giving me this for around $50. I don't think it's in any of our rights to complain. They have the best deal going! Come on people, get real. Bandwidth isn't cheap. At least it's not a 3GB cap or something stupid like that.
Cthulhu Saves.
I'd be interested to know how this 'bullet' technology works. I know a few people who have been having problems with the receivers in their VCRs (they choose not to rent a box and don't have premium/PPV channels) lately. Sure it could be a flaky VCR, but it's happened to more than one person with newish VCRs.
If Comcast is found to be damaging personal hardware with their 'bullet' it would be funny if those users were able to clame irreparable harm and sue for millions. In short, I think that Comcast better be very careful where they point their guns. In the end this can only be bad for them.
It costs time and money to handle complaints.
If your company is taking you for a ride with price, and there are no alternatives:
Talk slowly and eloquently, explain the situation, mention what you are and are not happy with etc.
You should be able to draw the complaint out to about half an hour, and if nothing happens, try again 2 or 3 weeks later.
blog.sam.liddicott.com
As true as the title I've affixed to this post may be, and as much as the broadband companies use the concept to justify their actions, there is also another truth. The choice to subscribe to a company's service is a right which cannot be taken away from you.
You will not die without broadband. You will not die without the Internet. Probably, your life will be enriched without it.
I have been pwned because my
It the wake of recent customer complaints, AT&T has started offering coupons to offset the monthly increase, but only for the next six months.
They planned on doing this from the very beginning. This is not in response to customer complaints. They knew this would be unpopular and came up with the coupon idea ahead of time.
The customers themselves turned over illegally modified cable boxes to the company when the boxes stopped working.
Call me crazy, but I don't think turning your illegally modified cable descrambler in to the cable company for repair after it stops working due to the cable company deactivating it is a good idea.
For bonus points, diagram the above sentence.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Loss, loss, loss... billions...
As if everyone would subscribe if the boxes would not be around.
Same goes for software, music - etc..
I wonder, those 10 subscribers they are suing, who didn't respond to calls. Are they dead? Never existed? Cats? see http://www.geocities.com/flutocracy/cablemodem.htm
SSL Certificate
OK I'm really confused now.. I got this email from the post above I placed saying someone has give modded me up +1. So i go back to look at all the comments and choose to read at level 3 to see my post easier.. Gee at the time now(10 mins after i got the email) there are no level 3 posts..
e r-encoding: 8bit
1 6922 3
Ok i'm thinkin i'll go to my preferences & see how/why it was modded back down. Well I go there and there is nothing listed for that comment as rated +1 interesting as the email tells me or anything bringing it back down to 2.
So what gives? Are the slashdot editors lowering comments they don't like or approve of?
heres the email headers below.. and i still haven't got any email sayin I was modded back down.. Seriously what gives here?
Return-Path:
Delivered-To: phunhippy@evolutionarydeadend.com
Received: (qmail 10645 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2002 07:51:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cpu59.osdn.com) (XX.XX.XX.XX)
by 0 with SMTP; 10 Jun 2002 07:51:33 -0000
Received: from [10.2.73.1] (helo=localhost)
by cpu59.osdn.com with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 17HKLh-0003Cf-00
for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 04:16:25 -0400
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 08:20 +0000
Subject: [Slashdot] Moderation of "from the comcast article"
From: slashdot@slashdot.org
To: phunhippy@evolutionarydeadend.com
Content-transf
Message-Id:
X-PMFLAGS: 34078848 0 1 P45D10.CNM
A user has given a "Insightful" (+1) moderation to
your comment.
from the comcast article
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=33925&cid=367
Attached to:
Comcast in Court, AT&T Gets Greedy
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/10/00222
Your comment is currently scored 3.
When customers called to say their service was out, Comcast sent a technician or asked subscribers to bring in the box. The company recovered 525 boxes that it said had been modified.
Several hundred Macomb subscribers received letters from a collection firm hired to recover money for Comcast. Most have already settled. Only people who didn't respond to letters or calls were sued, Hnilica said
considering that 509 of them took care of it on their own by doing so, and settled out of court, and only 16 of them are being sued for the 170k fine who didnt turn the boxes in...
who ya think is gonna end up paying less?
The nonsense that the article talks about, recent price hikes, electronic "bullets", etc., are just more examples of what corporations do to protect their cashflow. Who cares about individual rights if the bottom line is looking rosy?
The cable company that provided service for my dorm last semester ran these ads that encouraged other people to rat out people who were getting free cable. Does anyone else find this really humorous? I mean, if I know someone getting free cable, I'm going to ask them to hook me up, not turn 'em in for some Cable Industry Good Consumer Award.
Check out the site here.
Learn to Play Go
If you're trying to simplify life then removing the distractions will help greatly.
How are you gentlemen!
All your TV are belong to us!
The customers themselves turned over illegally modified cable boxes to the company when the boxes stopped working
-----
If they are stupid enough to turn over the hacked boxes they deserve their faith.
Hey now! Pokemon is NOT hallucinogenic. I watch it all the time....whoa! where'd all these pixies come from?!
Seriously, Pokemon doesn't cause hallucinations...it causes seizures, get it straight.
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
Their first mistake was to modify a box that the cable company owned. They should have bought a descrambler of their own on the grey market. These 3rd party descrablers are "bullet" proof anyway which would have completely solved the problem altogether before it started. Their second mistake was calling the cable company and complaining when their modified box stopped working. They should have been FAR more cautious than that. If I hacked something and it stopped working the first thing I'd assume is that it was either something I did or something the cable company did in response. I would have checked to see whether the box was still good, which is as simple as connecting the cable straight to the tv. At that point I'd take steps to replace the box on my own, or at the very least undo the hack, assuming that was possible, before handing it over to the cable company.
I heard of this same tactic being used when I was living in DC back in the late 80's. You would think that people would be wise to it by now.
I'll bet you that of the people who are stealing cable in that region, all that were caught were fools and idiots. Anyone with a brain would not be so easily busted. I figure the 170k is nothing more than a stupidity tax, something I never ever see a problem with.
A word of advice to all those who would break the law or do something that could get them in trouble, develop some street smarts and an ounce of common sense beforehand.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
TV and games could be ok if you're temporarily unable (too young or ill?) to realize your dreams. After you are able, do what makes you happy. Instant gratification might feel good in the short term but you'll always feel bad if you substitute it for your life ambitions.
Think of it as chipping away.
First owner of Modems - 90% say it not me.
Next it is tiered pricing - 90% say it not me.
Next content control - 90% say it not me.
Next bandwidth limits - oh yeah it already here!
Over Subscribe the channel - 1.5M down is maximum at 3 AM when your nieghbors are a sleep.
The only reason ATT raised the rates was to ofset the cost of the "FREE" cable modems that they are supplying to Dell to give away with computers, that you then have to subscribe to AT&T to use. Saving you a whopping 3 dollars per month. Not to mention screwing all of use who have purchased our own modems.
On the topic of stupid cable thieves who get tricked into turning themselves in, I just wanted to mention another trick the cable companies have pulled in the past.
You'd be watching your show, and right when the movie was due to begin, you'd see a message saying you won a prize (new TV, whatever), and to call a number to claim it. When you called and gave your name and address, you'd then wind up losing your cable service and/or having to pay a fine or go to court.
What happened? The cable company scrambled that ad with a key that no one was supposed to be set up to receive. But the modified boxes would treat it as a regular scrambled show and decode it. So only the cable pirates would get the message.
Our company does some business with ATT and have access to their Broadband information via employees (hence my anonymous, and hence a lack of specific geography).
One of the "goodies" that will be coming up after the Comcast/ATT merger will be the sudden announcement of all current home users to a 256K cap on bandwidth, and the next level (384K) will be available as a "premium" service for about $80 per month, with no static IP.
Businesses will get the 384K service and a static IP for $375/month, according to the source. The point behind this is that ATT doesn't want any home user to have static IP, and are going to try and price it outside the reach of the average person's ability to pay.
We're volume profit, while businesses are pure profit.
Also, one last point...the 'free ride' on ATT is over. On or about July 1, they will be installing what I've been told is the "new Cisco software" which will prevent anyone from homesteading IP addresses as has been the case. Apparently, the dynamic IPs will override the static IP in the present software, which means that when ATT went to a business, they could not guarantee that the IP address wasn't already taken by DHCP for a home user.
With the "new business model" that the merger will bring, the home user will have services cut and prices raised, which will subsidize the business services to the point where those monthly service charges from business will be pure profit at our expense.
It won't interfere with general service, but if you've not had your IP switched on you for a while, you'll likely lose service until you reboot your home network.
This guy was like you. There are places you can go if you need to talk to someone about your depression and Internet addiction. There are lots of resources that can help.
I have been pwned because my
When customers called to say their service was out, Comcast sent a technician or asked subscribers to bring in the box.
You should always take any dead bodies out of your car before dropping it off at the service station.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
170K ought to be enough for anyone ...
- Offer a better product at a lower price.
- Gain market share.
- Spend the money on creating better and cheaper products.
- GOTO 1.
In practice:Overly cynical, or an honest assessment of how a system composed of a few huge imcumbents actually works in practice? Make your own mind up.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
That won't make these people feel any less cheated. Yes, they can take their business elsewhere, but what about that cable modem they've already bought? As the article said, it was an act of faith in the company, a guarantee of staying with them until at least the modem itself was paid off. By switching the pricing scheme to target these people specifically, AT&T is basically saying "up yours" to these people.
So why shouldn't they feel upset at this again?
Just because Internet access is not a right (although I'd call it a luxury rather than privilege, as the term luxury implies that the customer actually gives something back for it) doesn't mean that companies should be screwing with their customers, and it's just plain stupid to screw with their best customers who are willing to pay a premium for a year or more.
This isn't a story of luxury vs. rights. This is simply a tale of mistreatment of customers.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
It really and truly sucks AT&T has decided to impose a rate hike on people choosing not to get screwed up the ass by them. Logically it makes sense, for every user not using an AT&T modem they're missing out on the rental fee of that modem. You can be sure the cost of the modem itself has amortized so only a fraction of the rental fee is actually used to cover the cost of it which they got at wholesale prices. Say they make five bucks a month off each rented modem, that is nice chunk of change when all of your subscribers are renting modems. Taking away a couple million free dollars from someone is going to make them pretty angry. However, thats the ropes of an industry with published standards. A DOCSIS capable modem is going to work on their network, paying customers ought not be prevented from buying their own modems.
There is some crappy legistlation around for cable television boxes that I hope doesn't end up repeated with cable modems. Under FCC rules a cable operator can't prevent you from buying your own cable equipment and using it as long as it conforms to all regulations and specifications. The crappy part is those rules don't prohibit a cable operator from requiring you rent some ludicrous piece of equipment like a remote control or converter. What I hope doesn't happen is the cable operators being required to let people buy their DOCSIS compliant modems buy they have to lease something as trivial as a T-splitter. This is bad legistlation and it would be shitty if it was applied to cable modems. However, there are also rules stating that a cable subscriber can set up all of their own equipment which makes me wonder how the circular logic if allowing an operator to require the lease of some piece of equipment while also maintaining that subscribers can maintain their own equipment.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
We don't have entrapment laws in the UK, but from what I understand of US law, doesn't this count as entrapment.
Strikes me that if they have the magic bullet technology which can disable the hacked boxes, then they should be using it on a daily basis. Not waiting for sufficient people to hack their boxes and then attempting to sue their asses for everything they're worth.
http://www.cabletheft.com/
God damn that's funny. I wonder if that actually works, I suppose you'd get some info from pissed off romantic partners or something.
Anybody know if we can get the addresses of AT&T's board members from the SEC or something?
We subscribe to Roadrunner + TW's basic cable in Bradenton, FL. One day we get our bill and the cable portion has jumped from ~$12 to over $40. I call, they say we're getting premium cable service, they've run a system audit, they're charging us what they should have charged us all along.
I'm like, "Say what?" You suddenly decide to give us and charge us for service we never ordered? Take it off our bill.
TW Rep: "I can't do that. You're enjoying the premium service and must pay for it."
Back and forth, no supervisor around, I call back the next day. TW assumption is that we have climbed the pole and removed a filter. I haven't. Our neighbors are in the their 70s and probably haven't either. I finally get bumped far enough up the TW customer "service" chain to get the charge removed, but not until after I file a (still unanswered) complaint with the FL Dept. of Consumer Affairs does the excess charge actually come off our bill.
The installer who comes out the next day to put on the correct filter says this happens all the time, that the day before he was out at the house of another suspected "cable pirate" who was in his 80s, in a wheelchair, and on a respirator, who sure hadn't been climbing poles, and had been paying the overcharge for months until his son came to visit and noticed his oversized cable bill.
The installer said the filters were often defective, that this was the problem more often than people stealing cable service, but that the company just assumed everyone was a thief and charged them no matter what.
I talked to the system's marketing manager. He told me almost all of the people who got extra service were stealing it on purpose, which contradicted the installer's comments. I don't know who to believe, but I am suspicious.
At least in FL I have a choice of 2 cable Internet service providers and a dozen DSL providers, and it's far enough south that sat TV is clear. In MD (my other residence) my only broadband Internet alternative is Comcast, and they suck so badly I endure a phone modem here, and we're in a tree-lined valley where satellite TV won't work.
Too bad FCC Chairman Powell loves and trusts cable TV companies so much that he doesn't mind them holding defacto monopolies over bradband Internet in much of the country. He ought to go to work for one of them if he loves them so much, and get off the public payroll, since he's not willing to lift a finger to help the citizens who pay his salary keep the cable TV operators from screwing them.
- Robin
Why the price hike?
The real expense of any organization is the people. Do you think AT&T hired more customer support people or installers per subscriber?
Being very familiar with their quality of service, I'd assume "no".
Happily, my town is one of the few with cable competiion. Yep, that's right, I can go with another provider. So goodbye AT&T, hello RCN. Yeah, I'll only save $9/month, but thats $96/year, and hopefully the quality of service will be much improved.
Yeah, I'll have a new email address. Then again, AT&T changed my email address very recently, so that won't stop me at all.
Does the town you live in have a cable service monopoly? If so, too bad.
This is analog cable they are talking about here. Calling it "code" makes it sound much more complicated than it actually is. Not that it could harm a VCR (or TIVO) anyway...
I remember the last time the "magic bullet" issue came up. This was several years ago, and it was TCI (the company AT&T bought out) doing it, IIRC.
Shortly after news of the coup hit the press, I started hearing about "magic bullet filters." They were sold under various names (both vague and unabashedly direct!), and were a shockingly simple notch filter.
That's it -- just a little circuit and resistor to keep the signal levels in safe limits for your pirate converter box. What I just read sounds very similar to what I remember:
- TCI went to General Instrument (the cable box manufacturer), and said "Okay, if you wanted to pirate cable, how would you do it?"
- General Instrument got hold of some of the "aftermarket" equipment, and reverse-engineered it.
- General Instrument figures out a signal they can inject into the cable system that will not affect 'legal' boxes, but will overdrive sections of the aftermarket chips -- thus doing irreperable damage, and rendering the cable box inoperative.
- TCI injects this signal into their system, and everyone who complains about dead cable receives a rather shocking bill. (If I remember news reports properly, it was $500 - $1000 and a promise to behave. It's been a while.)
Memory is a bit rusty, but that's pretty much how I remember it happening. I can't believe this old trick still works...(We're two R-E steps out, now... first the pirates were figuring out the scrambling and getting into "test mode," the second was General Instrument figuring out what differences there were between the 'official' systems and the aftermarket ones.)
"...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min
One thing people fail to mention is that when the prices were originally set three to four years ago($7.95 for cable modem rental), cable modems were still in the ~$300 range - even in bulk they were still in the ~$200 range.
Now, they can be had for $55 on cdw.com
Yes, people who bought their modems 3 years ago are getting screwed - BUT - if they paid $300 for their modem, they've basically made their investment back... Yes, they're not making a mint off of it, but they're also not getting screwed.
Look at it objectively - they're charging you $47.95/month for service, whether or not you own a modem. If you don't own a modem, they're charging you $3/month to rent a $60 modem.
States would probably jump on it as fraud in five seconds flat if AT&T continued charging $8/month to rent a $60 modem... The modem would be paid off in 10 months... But at $3/month, it'll take almost 2 years to justify it - normal for most leases.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
No, entrapment is when laaw enforcement plants the seeds of criminal conduct in the mind of the suspect.
Think vice cops begging someone to "just pay $20 and I'll give you an extrra 2 hours in the ho'tel". If that person wasn't out looking for a prostitute, then they may never have even broken the law if it weren't for the cops enticing them to do so.
With this, there are several points. First, the cable co isn't a law enforcement authority (unless there is something I haven't heard). And second, they never enticed someone to break the law. Of the two, I think the latter is the most important, because if they had enticed the cable thieves, this might be an adequate defense in court.
I hate these kind of fabricated numbers - the question is, would the 11 million people who are supposedly stealing cable and sat services (more detail here) have really bought 6 billion bucks worth of programming and pay-per-view if they didn't have their illegal access. I think their number would be far lower.
That's like the recording industry claiming massive theft when someone downloads a popular single they heard on the radio - would that person have actually gone out and purchased the CD for that song if the file-sharing apps weren't around? I doubt it, at least most of the time. I know I download hundreds of tunes that I never would have considered buying in the first place (but may now purchase because I get to hear what the CD sounds like - but that's a different argument...)
If I had access to free pay-per-view, I'd watch almost every movie out there, as I'm a huge movie buff. But I don't have free access, and I've never purchased a single pay-per-view program - how can the cable company claim any losses?
(Before you mod this as troll or flamebait, please do me and the community the courtesy of reading to the end to see the point that I'm making)
Replace with "obtaining access to a shared resource without paying the agreed price"
Replace with "access in excess of their contracted level"
Replace with "cable boxes modified in breach of their contract".
Replace with "Unauthorized access to the shared resource" and "lowers the maximum possible hypothetical gross earnings of the industry by"
Replace with "obtaining access to a shared analog resource in excess of your contract is a breach of that contract, and a possible breach of copyright, both of which are actionable in civil lawsuits, but neither of which can be prosecuted as criminal acts."
Gosh, what a change that makes. And yet my interpretation is closer to the one that a court will use to determine the type and degree of offence here, because it will actually deal with what the law says, and not what Comcast wishes that it says.
Some context: I neither perform nor endorse obtaining access to cable content in excess of your contract. I thoroughly welcome individual lawsuits against individuals who do this (rather than against those providing the tools, or legislating against technology), and indeed any suit that makes individuals responsible for their actions. I understand that these suits are civil only because the devices in question are analog, and that under the DMCA, modifying a digital device to obtain access to copyighted content would be a criminal offence.
But what I will not let slip by is the manipulation of language and law to create a crime where none exists, nor will I accept the use of hate speech to brand end consumers as criminals when breach of contract in the business world is spun as oversight, regrettable necessity or overzealous compliance with the fiduciary duty to maximise profit. When a business breaches contract law by (e.g.) trying to enforce an unreasonable contract clause, do we call them criminals and jail them as a menace to society? No, we say that they are behaving unreasonably, that they are in breach of contract law, we (perhaps) levy a small fine, and we instruct them to comply with both the letter and spirit of the contract. That is all.
These people obtaining premium cable are in breach of contract. That, and only that. They are not criminals, and I rather hope that some of them invest in a libel suit to demonstrate that.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
these fines (170k) seem a bit much to me.
so what, a $30 dollar fine and a slap on the wrists? i'm sorry but to prevent this kind of thing from happening again they need to not only THREATEN large penalties, but actually IMPLEMENT them as well. i reckon 170k and no criminal record is quite a deal...
Screw-em, then screw-em s'more.
No sympathy for the cable companies under any circumstances. Nothing. Never.
I am of the opinion that what Comcast has done, in regards to its cable television theft problem, is perfectly legit. They own the cable box, they own the cable television distribution. People are modifying Comcast's equipment and also stealing the bread and butter of Comcast. They deserve what they get for stealing.
Of course, the sad thing is that those areas of Michigan aren't known for having the highest of income levels. Those 16 households that didn't contact Comcast are probably barely treading water over their debt. Then they receive some gigantic, "We believe that you have stolen our cable for 2 years" bill, which probably amounts to a few grand or more.
Some people believe that if they ignore something, it will go away. That is probably what those 16 households were thinking... I know, it is bizarre to think that way, but people do think that way.
What Comcast should do, is simply refuse to service those "customers". It would probably be a much more fiscally responsible thing to do. If those people are to the hilt with debt. Comcast will get stuck with a giant lawyer bill and those people will be forced to declare bankruptcy and may end up losing everything that they barely own. 16 families out in the street.
Way to go Comcast.
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
These "rat on your neighbors" programs (Business Software Alliance in particular, but the principle is general) REALLY get on my nerves. Guilty if accused is a BADLY broken policy and needs to be driven home to everyone.
The distribution boxes in a cable network are made so that their loss is always equal - independently of real load connected. If it were not true, it would mean that the signals reflected from the free ends of cables and the parasytic signals from heterodynes spoil the signal.
:-(
The only method to really spoil the signal is the connection directly to the backbone cable with your own distribution box or without it - just in parallel
So the only losses are lost revenue.
For those who heard his speech, he was pronouncing terror as 'terror' and not 'terrah'. Did anyone else catch that? Did he actually make the switch sooner?
I love that scene in Almost Famous where Philip Seymour Hoffman wears the t-shirt that says 'Detroit Sucks'!!
If I own a high-rise overlooking a baseball stadium and with the purchase of $70 binoculars, I can watch a baseball game, does that mean I'm stealing?
Likewise, if I replace components of my car to make it go faster, does Ford have the right to destroy those components?
If I were one of those customers, I would most certainly bring a countersuit.
It seems to me that the cable companies are standing on the logical and philosophical equivalent of thin ice.
Critical Thought
Have you seen their stock price recently? Turns out this internet stuff is expensive!
I think the fines should be higher for cable theft, and even add jail time. Hey, If I walk into a store and Steal $130.00 a month worth of merchandise, or better yet phone cards to be more akin to a service theft... I'd be publically fried and jailed, yet people think that cracking down on cable service theft is unfair. Great! please tell me where you live so I may run extension cords to your house and a Hose from your outside faucet.. it's my right to steal from you....
also, if you dont like your cablemodem price hike... BOO-FRICKING-HOO... get something else. and if cable is the only broadband, then quit whining about the cost of your luxuries...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Ok, I'm in the Northeast, I've got a cable modem, I've got AT&T.
How do I get the coupon? It wasn't in the story, does anyone know?
--
RumorsDaily
I have never heard of any equipment (beyond 'pirate' ICs) that has been damaged by the "magic bullet" signal.
There has been a lot of "what if..?" talk, but I cannot recall any actual, documented damage.
(Then again, I haven't searched Google on this topic, so I could be very wrong. You have been warned.)
"...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min
I don't know why so many businesses these days are going out of their way to punish their existing customers. It seems as if practically every business now offers deals to new customers that are not available to their loyal customers.
I wonder what management text or B-school case study they get THAT advice out of?
To avoid getting shafted, you practically have to PLAN on switching credit cards, banks, phone companies, etc. annually.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
I believe that if its on my land, I should be able to use it as I see fit. If the cable company supplies me with basic cable and the same line has more information on it, I should be able to do what I want with the extra stuff. If a satellite company's signal is bouncing off my land I should be able to do whatever I want with that signal. I have no contract with them, I did not ask for the signal. I am going to use it as I see fit. Send DirecTV a certified letter giving them 15 days to remove their signal from your property and see what happens. Someone tried this before and it did not get very far.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
$170.000, riiiight. They probably figured these "pirates" had access to all premium channels, and were watching them all at once, 24x7. Next, they'll claim these modded boxes were somehow being used to fund terrorism.
Some may argue that this is a punitive fine, but even so it is excessive. Yes, these "pirates" deserve some sort of punishment, but the punishment must fit the crime. Excessive or random punishment is detrimental to a lawful society, as people lose respect for all the Law.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
NAHHHHHH
I talked to the system's marketing manager. He told me almost all of the people who got extra service were stealing it on purpose, which contradicted the installer's comments. I don't know who to believe, but I am suspicious.
Remember, the marketing manager gets paid to beat the truth so thin you can see through it. Besides, when have you ever met a marketing person prone to telling the truth about *anything*?
T has performed about as well as LNUX in recent years.
I just received my 6 months worth of coupons in the mail. AT&T is smart to enact this "coupon campaign". They know that half the people that receive these coupons will think they're junk mail. Then the subscribers who do intend to use them may forget to use them at all. It's basically a cheap ploy by AT&T to make it seem like they care about their customers. They're saying hey we realize that you're not happy about this rate hike so here's 6 months of coupons to help out. This way AT&T appears as though they care. All the while they know that they'll only have a small percentage of subscribers return these coupons. So in the end they get what they want, more $$$$.
I've seen my local canadian television go downhill when faced against the behemoth of american corporate television.
All they show is the cheezy Canadian sci-fi crap that looks like it has about $50 per episode in the budget.
Have you ever surfed the web through a ssh connection using Lynx? It is pretty interesting...
I actually have done that but kept running into pages with frames that Lynx didn't like. I tried it with Links instead and it worked much better on the problem pages. I even log into hotmail with it just fine.
For example, there is little on cable that is necessary. It is nice to have. I once had it. Don't have it anymore. The cable kept going out and it took several days on each incident to fix it. I got rid of cable because it was causing more frustration that it was worth. I miss cable, but I am not going to deal with customer service of an hour every few weeks. I can go to two movies a week, or one small concert a week, for what they were charging me for cable. I don't steal cable because it is just not important. I feel sad for people who do.
DSL is the same thing. I love DSL and I am fortunate that I live in an area with multiple DSL providers. I can get pissed at one and move to another. I understand that not everyone has that luxury, or even can get DSL. But it is just DSL. Like all non-critical products, if it gets too expensive, go to dialup, or cable. It is hard, but the companies have no obligation to charge an amount that fits your budget. It has a responsibility to charge an amount that enough people will pay to maximize profits.
If we would treat these services as options in our lives, the companies would not likely be so disrespectful. At this point, they feel they are doing us a favor providing such wonderful services at such reasonable prices. These feeling are validated by frantic people calling customer service begging for these services, and apparently unaffected by high prices. They have a good life, and know it.
If cable and DSL are fundamental rights in our new world, maybe we should regulate them more aggressively. Does it need to cost $30 for basic and $50 for digital cable? Unlikely. Do companies need to make more of an effort getting broadband to the masses? Probably. But it is a catch 22. To make these necessities affordable, like telephone, electricity, and water, they must be regulated. To make a regulated market attractive, the services must be nearly universally used. Many people still chose not to have cable or DSL.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
How many support calls does AT&T get where the problem turns out to be the cable modem?
The rate hike, at least in my area, is not as large as the modem leasing fee. The modem leasing fee is $10/month. The rate hike for people who don't use leased modems is $7/month. Could this be considered a support charge for modems?
But what I will not let slip by is the manipulation of language and law to create a crime where none exists
5 3. htm
0 5. htm
47 USC 553 and 605 make cable theft a federal crime.
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/47usc5
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/47usc6
I give your post a 9.5 on style, but I'm afraid you receive a 2.0 on content due to the inappropriate manipulation of language.
So said Benito Mussolini, in "The Fascist Decalogue"
No more sympathy for whiny law-breakers!!
I mean, do you somehow think you have the RIGHT to question the laws and their enforcement?
Well, maybe those of us who do rent the modem from AT&T should be "careful". I mean after all, if say, once a week, my modem got fried and they had to replace it 3 to 4 times a month, they might start thinking it is a bargain to give folks $10 off a month to provide their own (and thus be responsible for their own).
Maybe if a number of us end up costing them $300 a month, they'll start thinking twice about porking the few customers who are saving them money.
The TV antenna!
I cut my cable, and put up an antenna on my house. Sure, no more SCI-FI channel for me, but
I loose a lump in my budget too. And I get a lot
more free time because the TV set is not as magnetic as it was with 1x10^33 channels
No that is a MYTH by the cable companies. Code is quite right, a digital code is transmitted on an FM channel on the cable, this tells the cable box things like the channel name, the current time, what channels it should get. You can hook up a radio to your cable and listen, it varies for different brands of cable boxes. All a "bullet" does it tell it to shut off all channells, usually remedied by unplugging the box for 15 minutes. All the notch filter is is an FM trap.
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." George HW Bush
reasoning behind the price is probably much more convoluted than one may initially think. AT&T Broadband's recordkeeping *absolutely* sucks. They really have no idea who owns a modem and who leases.
For the longest time they were charging me the lease fee despite the fact I owned the modem. Despite my protests, they kept on charging on me. Finally, I threatened them to show me documentation indicating they had actually leased me a modem (which they couldnt do),stop overcharging me (and give me past money back), or I'd take them to court. Of course, they had no records so they *finally* gave in. What a pain.
So instead of cleaning up their record keeping their going to lease everyone a modem so they'll know what to charge all their customers. No one would go out and buy a cable modem now. Not worth it at this point. So its an easy single pricing system for ATT broadband to keep track of.
Doesn't "a lot" refer to a parcel of land?
(ex: John's grandmother left him a lot in the family cemetary)
and "allot" refers to allocating?
(ex: I was alloted my usuall one bowl of rice in the camp.)
"alot" is a colloquialism meaning;
- many
- a large quantity
(ex: Boy, you have alot of candy there.)
When will ppl learn that when they view others content they are puppets. Create your own entertainment....when you're 75 and dying from heart disease you'll look back and remember an endless stream of really poor content instead of a real life. Do Something useful. Television is worse than big tobacco...it kills your soul.
First off, it is theft to steal TV signal, and it is theft to uncap your modem. I say go get em...
Second, even though DSL is a bit more secure, I will take cable bandwith anyday... my home connect, which only costs me around 30 bucks a month, allows me to pull files at well over 500K/s. The best I ever got with DSL (at twice the cots), was 110K/s and my uber expensive SDSL connect for work barely breaks 200K/s.
I am thinking about dropping cable televion and
just getting internet access until DSL comes my way. $79.00 for cable.. I don't watch much television. And... Heck it's broaband. basic cable would still be available. I am looking
for alternatives. Maybe DirectTV and DSL.
or.. perhaps I can get a T1 to my house and sell
bandwidth via 802.11b. I allready have wireless
access to my company assigned laptop, hacked compaq IA-1 on my dresser, and wireless access for my kids room on the second floor. Everything else is 100 BaseT cat 5. if I can get 20 subscribers in my neighborhood I will be in business
"When customers called to say their service was out, Comcast sent a technician or asked subscribers to bring in the box. The company recovered 525 boxes that it said had been modified. "
Why would they bring their boxes that they knew where illegal back to the cable company's? Are these guys idiots or what? Or did the not know it was illegal?
weird.
I wanted an intenet phone line, before I got broadband, being in a big city my ISP is a local call. So I didn't want any long distance service on the 3rd line, cuz they charge something, even if you make zero long distance calls. Well then they said they where required to charge like $3 or was it $5 a month no have no long distance carrier. A charge not to be able to do something, like the DOT charging people who don't have a car. That is insane. Corperations all suck, all they car about is making money, time to go amish.(oh wait, then i can't get my /. fix OH NO!!) At least most open source companies don't try and suck you dry.
LinuxWorx
Spelling errors are intentional as are gramatical error
The cable company and satelite companies are not seeing excess costs by you picking their broadcast signal from the air or from a cable
Actually, they do get hit on the bottom line, as follows:
There are a significant number of people consuming their service and not paying. If they were not tapping it for free, SOME of them would do without, and SOME would buy it (or another company's service). The ones that would do witout don't count. But the ones that would buy their service (along with the ones currently tapping some competitor's service that would buy theirs - the mirror image of the ones who would buy the competitor's if not tapping theirs) represent lost revenue.
Now if they were able to pick up some of that revenue, any left after enforcement costs would represent more net for them, to be split among the owner's profit, content producers revenue, and potential cost reductions (as fixed costs plus enforcement costs are distributed more broadly, leading to a lower consumer price for the max-profit equilibrium).
Needless to say, they feel burned that they're not getting that money, while people who aren't paying it ARE getting the signals they spend so much time, effort, and money to provide to paying customers.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Demand I pay extra? Outrageous!! I squander enough of my time watching that "premium" junk, why should I squander my money, too?
Cable companys have been using them for a long time. I belive at one point they where declaired illegal in NY becuase they where destorying VCRs, TVs and what not. Most new TVs and VCRs are designed to handle it. But things like black boxes becuase they change the resistinces will get knocked out by them.
Face it, you steal cable, thats your risk. It doesn't bother me. It WILL bother me if my VCR, TV or DVD player get killed becuase of it.
until (succeed) try { again(); }
"Yowza! better not do that."
I'll bet there are at least two who are saying
"What idiots! I would never get caught like that! Let's see: Start with a third party converter. Add hack... Presto!"
At the same time, there are the masses who actually pay for premium services, who allegedly fit the bill for those who don't. They hear: "Theft of cable TV costs the industry an estimated $6 Billion a year." So this means there are thousands of people out there stealing cable, not getting caught! The cable co's are admitting this! If I was a premium channel subscriber, I'd wonder if I'm the dummy.
"Most of the people caught have already settled." I wonder how much the settlement was for. I'll bet much less than $170k.
So all this legal "sewage" may actually be encouraging people to do it after all. Luckily (I guess), I don't have cable. Though I can see how people would go to these extremes to aviod advertising.
If YOU had a modified cable box and it stopped working, would you
#1 - quietly plug the original back in and call the cable company...
#2 - turn in the 'modified' black market box you got to the cable company and report to jail ?
If you answered 2 then you should join these other 525 MORONS, in the line for terminally STUPID people.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
with the broadband hike, all you have to do is call and tell them you want to cancel and they'll give you a month for free. keep doing it every month and you'll have no problem. a friend of mine did this with aol for 2 years and now has att-bi and has been doing it for six months.
accept AT&T's modem AND buy your own; only hook it up when you're actually watching? If they want to give you a modem for free, I say go ahead and take it, but they can't make you use it, can they?
Actually this indirectly could be a good thing. The reason a number of Broadband alternatives such as Wireless, Various DSL alternatives and Sprint Ion went under was their cost of delivery was higher than the market would pay. So if AT&T drives the price up more competitors will enter the market which at some point will drive the price down again and stay do to competition hopefully after they've amortized their startup costs and then can afford to drop prices and stay in biz.