Slashdot Mirror
Time Warner Cable Box Rental Inspired Antitrust Lawsuit
EmagGeek writes "Matthey Meeds, a real-estate agent, was so irritated about having to pay the monthly rental fee that on Tuesday he filed an antitrust suit against Time Warner Cable and its 84 percent owner, Time Warner Inc. The suit alleges that, by linking the provision of premium cable services to rental of the cable box, the companies have established illegal tying arrangements. 'Time Warner's improper tying and bundling harms competition,' Meeds' lawsuit states. 'Since the class can only rent the cable box directly from Time Warner, manufacturers of cable boxes are foreclosed from renting and/or selling cable boxes directly to members of the class at a lower cost.' I pay Comcast over $25/mo for my two DVRs. I'd love to just be able to buy them or build my own. I can't wait to see how this unfolds."
Exactly wrong. Premium cable channels were originally commercial free in the U.S. That was one of the reasons early cable was a "big deal." One watched movies on HBO for example, not commercials. AMC is another good example. No commercials ever. Almost all cable channels in the late 70s / early 80s had limited or no commercials. Then the commercial creep set in. Commercials between the movies. OK. Commercials during the movie, lots of them. And in the intervening time cable rates have gone up at rates that far exceed inflation. We're paying more for cable and getting way more commercials. It's crap. And before someone says that channels like AMC now offer original programming, let me remind you that they introduced commercials long before they produced original programming.