Slashdot Mirror
Comcast Facing Lawsuit Over Set-Top Box Rentals
Multichannel News reports that a woman from California has initiated a potential class-action lawsuit against Comcast for making customers rent a set-top box without giving them the option to buy it outright. Quoting:
"The action, on behalf of Comcast Corp. customer Cheryl Corralejo, alleges that the set-top rental practice represents an 'unlawful tying arrangement resulting in an impermissible restraint of trade.' In addition to violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the suit alleges the practice violates business and professions codes. ... [It also notes] that premium video and the set-top descramblers are two distinct products, yet the cable providers require that the hardware be rented from cable companies, rather than permitting consumers to purchase the set-top hardware in the open market.
for some reason the open market has not seen this great idea come to fruition
they'll still tie you to their service; and then they can ask a ridiculous price for the box.
It's a shame CableCard never caught on - then companies like TiVO could have offered a viable alternative to a set top box. Yes, I realize I'd pay an additional monthly fee; but Tivo2go is worth it to me. Plus; real competition might force cable companies to offer similar products for less.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
I think the plaintiff had better clean up her Sherman Anti-Trust Act violations first.
The solution is very simple. If you don't want to rent the box then don't subscribe to the service. DUH! There are plenty of other options out there such as IPTV, Dish, and DirecTV.
"The action, on behalf of Comcast Corp. customer Cheryl Corralejo"
.. :)
.. one of the attorneys in the California case also filed the Meeds case"
.. I think it's understandable for Comcast to want to rent boxes as, if the end-users buy directly from the media providers, what's in it for Comcast. Streaming Media is a huge hog of bandwidth, as the ISPs in the UK are discovering with the iPlayer and other services. The ISPs and the content providers are currently in disagreement as to who should pay to upgrade the network infrastructure ..
I wonder just who she is fronting for? reading on
"the claim is nearly identical to one filed on behalf of Missouri consumer Matthew Meeds
Aw, go on
davecb5620@gmail.com
This is obviously a violation of the Sherman Act, and now that the DOJ has a chance of being on the side of the law and not big business after Bush leaves, its time to start filing them. I say legally NUKE comcast to oblivion.
As Americans, we need to retake control of our communications systems. That USED TO BE the job of the FCC!
I was a happy user of a cable card (M-Card) from Comcast until just recently. I just switched to Verizon FIOS and am using their cable cards now. No problems installing with either company so yes, they are offering them. Neither knows what an M-Card (multistream cable card) is when you call although Comcast installers had them.
This doesn't address the point here though as both providers require you to rent the cable cards. Even if you already own one, you cannot use it with their network unless you are renting it from them. Ok, so the cards rent at a lesser fee, neither company here will sell it to me. A card is just a smaller box in this regard.
several problems with "open market" set tops and CableCards.
1) Cable Providers download code to the settops to ensure that they are receiving the correct channels and decrypt properly. Cable companies cannot support 3rd party equipment, so if an 'open market' settop box cannot handle the code, then ... the consumer is screwed. However, if the consumer is using a supplied box, then it is 100% supported by the cable company, if the box cant handle the code, than the cable company takes care of it.
2) about CableCARD.
CableCard is not a '2way' device. it only receives cable singles, and cannot send. This is why they are severly limited with service. Most 'Digital Cable' providers have a lot of switched services to save bandwidth and ensure quality services for Each customer. switched services require a return path from the customers equipment so they can in turn be sent the feed the customer is tuning too.
Since CableCards do not send a return, any channel or service sent via some sort of digital broadcast is out of the question. Thanks to Cable Card, just like the Paten system, its another way to limit innovation, by keeping technology in the past.
my 2 cents
I have the Time Warner DVR and boy am I glad I rent and not own. I've been using the DVR for about 3 years maybe 4 and I can'tcount the number of times I've run to the Time Warner kiosk at the mall and exchanged a dead for a new one. Whenever I go to swap one out there are always several stacks of boxes 3 ft high or so of returns. On the bright side I guess I always have the best Scientific Atlanta box time warner has to offer.
... if it weren't such a piece of shit.
Comcast needs to demand that their box manufacturer let a real geek program the box and shoot the managers (though I would really much more prefer that they suffer a horrible lingering painful death) that try to interfere.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I second this post. Back when I had cable (Rogers in Canada), my Scientific Atlanta PVRs would die every 13-15 months. I had the option to buy one at 399$ or 499$ (I forget which) with a 1 yr warranty. I would have ended up spending thousands replacing them, instead of paying the 10$ a month rental fee. I also ended up getting a newer model every time I had to exchange it.
Now that I have satellite, I also rent my PVR. Its been going strong for almost 2 years now, and once my 2 yr contract is over, I get to exchange it for a newer, better model free of charge. OIr if it happens to die, I get a free replacement, no questions asked, and no money out of my pocket.
Now this is only for PVRs as they tend to not last as long. For regular boxes they've lasted for years without needing a replacement, so for those it makes a little more sense to buy if you plan staying with the same service longer than the associated cost of buying a box. Let's say the rental of a box is 5$ a month, and 199$ to buy. If you stick with the same service for more than 40 months in this case, and the box is reliable, then it makes more sense to buy as you'll at least break even on your purchase.
It's better to burn out than to fade away
They have the same policy. The fact I could not purchase a box was the reason I chose not to sign.
Who wants to BUY a cable box they force you to use? The real issue is that the cable companies want to force you to use THEIR SELECTED equipment. Since there is little or no competition with cable, what consumers need and want is freedom to use the EQUIPMENT of their own choosing. THAT would make a far better lawsuit.
I have a TiVo HD. Let me tell you, it was a nightmare trying to get it to work properly with Cox Cable. You think that CableCard solved the issues? Think again. There are different versions of the card and issues with resetting them and the techs are CLUELESS. But then Cox activated SDV (Shared Digital Video) the week after I FINALLY got everything working. Poof- I could then not access 2/3rds of the HD channels. Cox couldn't tell me WHY I couldn't get the stations, and kept sending out useless techs. Then they tried to charge me for the service calls. After many hours on the phone, I FINALLY got someone who actually knew what they were doing.
They activated SDV without telling any customers or even training their techs what they were doing and instantly made it impossible for anyone not using Cox equipment to get many channels. It completely ruined the whole concept of CableCards. And Cox was not the only cable company doing it, either.
Well, it was my great fortune that after a few weeks of that hell, Cox suddenly stopped using SDV and then everything worked again. I heard through my inside connections that Cox was having problems with some of their own equipment and SDV, so they temporarily stopped using it. It hasn't been a year yet, but rest assured that Cox will start using SDV again, and then every customer with an HDTV + cablecard, or TiVO + cablecard, or any other type of non-Cox equipment will be out in the cold yet again.
I just signed up for uverse. The DVR "rental" is free (I.e. built into the cost of the service) so I am curious how that would be addressed in this.
Religion and politics, without the flame. godgab.org
oh, darn! there go my Sell One More points!
I wonder how this will effect Direct Tv? Their terms of service state that in spite of the fact you pay to acquire there receivers that you are in fact only leasing them and must return them if you cancel.
From 11 months ago. Panasonic already has a tru2way television on the market already.
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
AT&T required it's subscribers to rent telephones from WE; they were not permitted to buy their own.
Sounds just like the thing going on here, doesn't it, with the difference that Comcast buys the set top boxes from a third party; the key is they are forcing subscribers to use this one and no other to enrich themselves via a forced revenue stream.
This issue was a major factor in the modified final judgment that broke up AT&T.
Yes, AT&T was a little different, but not that much.
Apart from that, the Communications act 1996 required that set-top boxes be freely available for consumers to purchase to prevent this sort of thing.
It would not surprise me one bit if this thing really gets off the ground.
Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.
Partially quoting from above with my own editing: [There are] several problems with "open market" set top boxes and\or Cable Cards in regard to having\running a profitable business: The scenario is that Video Signal Providers download code to the set top boxes and cable cards to ensure that they are receiving the correct channels and that they decrypt the incoming signals properly. The Video Signal Providers [do not] support 3rd party equipment because of the potential costs involved in attempting to train their techs to be able to support [all possible] 3rd party equipment, unless, maybe, the user subscribes to or purchases PREMIUM SUPPORT, [so] if an 'open market' set top box or cable card cannot handle the code sent at it from the provider, then ... the consumer may not be able to get support for the 3rd party equipment from the provider. If the consumer is using a supplied-by-the-signal-provider set top box or cable card, then it is 100% supported and if it can't handle the code, then the signal provider takes care of it.
-Business.
cjacobs001
...the congress should change the law to prohibit any infrastructure provider from also selling service over that infrastructure. If the cable, telephone, electric, etc. utility plants were required to be run as an independent, stand alone business from the content provided (electrical generation, content sourcing, telecommunication connection backend) there would be fewer tying problems.
Now, that said, there might still be other issues over interfaces and who's problem it is when things break, but physical connections are pretty easy to check.
I see it like the long distance telecom market. 30 years ago you had Ma Bell. You paid through the nose for anything you wanted. Then deregulation came to being, and as a result the long distance market - since it was content only and no infrastructure - became a seriously competitive area. We went from $0.25/min, minimum, for any LD call to a couple of cents a minute, and the price has been pretty stable.
Unfortunately, the "government is bad" mantra we've been fed by the right misses the point that standardization (open, IP unencumbered - or at least compulsory licensed) is good for consumers. Sure NTSC wasn't great, but it WORKED, for everyone. ATSC was an absolute abortion, and was the result of the FCC having no backbone whatsoever.
Unfortunately, we need more regulation of telecom, not less, but it needs to be GOOD regulation. Invalidation of all local monopoly contracts would be a good start. If you keep these companies from dipping their fingers into all the pies, you'll find they will play much better. They will kick and scream and throw money at lobbiests, but the best solution is a fixed standard. Hell, the gov't might as well commandeer IP for the purpose - the common good, you might say.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm going though this headache now. I called up Comcrap to order an m-stream CableCard, and the idiot sales person had no idea what I was talking about. I asked for a supervisor, who claimed that they only had m-stream cards in California. I told her to put on my work request that I wanted an m-stream card. I called sales later in the day, and she even called down to dispatch to verify that my work order had a request for an m-stream card. Very nice and knowledgeable installer comes out with 2 s-stream cards. He says, of course they have m-cards. His dispatcher made a note on my account saying that I requested an M-stream card and they should have delivered one. They had suggested that hopefully Comcast would just not charge me for the second card, but after talking with their billing department, the person said while they could do that, I would be better off getting an m-stream card so that I don't have problems every month, so now they are bringing out a m-stream card.
Of course, Comcrap is now charging you the same monthly fee as a stupid damn box, because they are calling it a "digital outlet" fee.
They should make all boxes rent to own with a cap on how much over there price they can bill you as rent fees. Also only have 1 HD and or DVR fee per house. Also they should let you buy it outright with them being forced to let you port it to other networks. Also they should let you put bigger hd in the with out being locked out for doing that.
The Cable guard, Protection Plans and others cover replacing them at no cost , no rent time reset, and no 2 year re lock in.
also mirroring fee / outlet fees / card fees should also be part of that as well.
This will be a little hard to explain, so I'll try and be as sensible as possible. There are "must carry" regulations that control what Cables can and can't scramble. They have to Carry local channels and they have to carry stations like TBS in an unscrambled/unencrypted format. (my significant other and I have had many arguements about this.) "Scrambling" is an Analogue concept that applied to Analog NTSC Cable. Cable companies don't do this any more, they simply stick it on the "Digital Teir" and encrypt the shit out of it. Digital Cable" uses QAM. (Quadurature Amplitude Modulation.) QAM gets encrypted heavily by cable companies.
Now, most Digital Televisions, and Digital VCRs (but not those cheap DTV Converters) have QAM tuners (call this "Digital Cable Ready") in addition to ATSC Tuners (Digital Terrestrial Tuners.)
Now must of these "Digital Cable Boxes" that the cable company provides, output ONLY Analogue RF NTSC out, (at 480p) or Composite out. (also 480p.) if you want 720p or 1080i, you have to get one of their "HD" packages to get a "box" with Component or HDMI output. (so its the digital cable boxes that prevent just everyone subscribing to get "HD".
Here is the problem. The Cable companies consider their QAM tier to be entirely Premium channels all 100+ of them. So they feel entitled to encrypt the whole thing. Not only that, they are moving regular NTSC Channels to the Digital Teir and encrypting them. Save the ones that under the US's must carry Rule. (I think Canada is as variation of the way.)
Now here is the killer, while there is no hard and fast date for this like the Febuary 17th 2009 switch, its expected the Analogue Cable teirs will go dark some time in 2012 or 2013. So what we are likely to see sometime in that year, is a situation where maybe 20 local channels and must carry nationals are in Clear QAM, and virtually everything else is Encrypted. And there is no Analogue Teir at all. Without a set top Box rental, you will be better off watching OTA ATSC, and not subscribing to cable at all.
That is the future of Television.
All Comcast has to do is show that cable TV and set top boxes are not separate products, and *poof* the antitrust suit disappears.
TiVo and other companies that sell CableCARD-compatible set-top boxes to retailers have already shown in the U.S. market that set-top boxes are a separate product. So I don't see Comcast being able to pull off such a defense.
They have the same policy. The fact that I could not purchase an IBM z10 mainframe was the reasons I chose not to sign.
No really, I have to wonder why IBM is not guilty, when they control 90% of the mainframe market and force you to rent the mainframe from them, with no option for purchase. Is this not a violation of the Sherman act?
Palm trees and 8
I just had. Why in hell can't I simply rent/buy a cable card for my PC that not only gives me CTV with Digital Access but also Broadband Modem Capabilities? Talk about finally getting some digital convergence as they've talked about for the last decade. How many people would be willing to pay for this kind of service/product and when you combine it with Vista/Windows 7, all of the DRM lovers would actually have a win situation in front of them. Producers would be able to draconically control media access (rent programs instead of permanently saving them), force us to watch damn commercials instead of skipping them along with all the other aspects of control they want and MS is quite willing to hand it to them on a damn silver platter if they'd only get off their asses and work together. arghh!!! Can't the idiots even see this idea? Copyright Fast Turtle (fturtle+copy@gmail.com)
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
Do you suckers actually pay for that crap?
I have a HDTV I paid big money for, and I also have Charter cable. I have just a basic package, but my local stations are HD through Charter. I cannot receive OTA, due to a large mountain blocking the signal between me and the tower, even though I am 20mi from the towers, so cable is my only option to watch local programming.
I do not have a descrambler box, and my local Charter office told me that starting in February, I will have to rent a cable tuner box from them to continue receiving my local channels in HD, for they will be scrambling all local HD stations effective then. In addition to that, I will also have to pay an additional fee to have those channels in HD, on top of renting their damn box.
A friend of mine who lives in an area where he can receive OTA also has Charter. He and I both have the same TV. He showed me how different OTA looks verses Charter's HD signal of the local stations. He also showed me how the signal looks when the cable is connected straight to the TV (not using Charter's tuner box). In a nut shell, the Charter HD signal from their tuner box blows goats in picture quality. He has tried everything he could to improve the picture quality when the signal comes from the tuner box (swapping boxes, ect) and nothing helps. I asked my local office if I could just rent or buy a pass-through box only so I could use the tuner on my TV come February, rather than have their tuner box. I was told that will never be an option. I will be forced to rent their tuner box, and pay an additional fee just to see my local stations in HD.
I see satellite TV in my near future.
"This is America... where the will of the few outweigh the outrage of the many..." - Unknown
It wasn't until the 1968 Carterfone decision that AT&T was forced to give up this monopoly and allow other devices to be connected to the Public Switched Telephone Network. RJ-11 jacks followed, as did the flood of third parties making telephones. Today you can buy a phone very cheaply. You wouldn't be very happy if AT&T were charging $5/month for each phone and had the exclusive right to rent them.
Comcast is following the old AT&T monopoly model, the only difference being that the manufacturing of the boxes is outsourced. Cable boxes are available only from them. You can't buy them, and they arbitrarily decide on the monthly rental charge. (For simplicity, we'll let Comcast represent the entire cable industry here.)
Someday, perhaps soon, we will have a Federal Trade Commission that will use its enforcement powers to declare this arrangement to be illegal. Comcast will fight it in the courts, as did AT&T, but eventually they will lose, and will be forced to separate the cable box business from the television service. We consumers will then have the right to either continue renting our boxes or to buy it, with or without a service contract.
The bigger threat to Comcast, however, is the competition for delivery of content, where they don't have a complete monopoly. (They do own some of the cable channels, though.) Today, we can legally receive programs over-the-air, by cable, satellite, and Internet. As more and more of us go to the Web for our video entertainment, Comcast and the other cable companies may become increasingly irrelevant and lose more and more of their market share. The Obama Administration is talking about universal broadband service, which would be a big blow to cable TV. When that happens, I'm guessing that HBO and Showtime will decide to sell monthly subscriptions to their shows over the web (or through the iTunes music store). If they are successful, it's not long until Game Over for the cable companies.
I'm glad to see lawsuits moving forward against the cable companies and I hope that someone takes on DirecTV for their new practice of forcing everyone to lease the equipment even after paying a $99 or $199 purchase fee and getting hit with $4.99 lease fee a month on top of other service charges.
Eight or nine years back when DirecTV was getting started I was happy to sign up without a contract and also to purchase my own Sony SAT-T60 series 1 DirecTivo receiver for a few hundred dollars and I didn't mind the one-time expense knowing that I'd own the equipment and I could upgrade it or hack it for more storage, which is what most folks ended up doing. Now that HDTV is out I looked at upgrading my DirecTV equipment and I found their new equipment lease policy in the contract which immediately ticked me off knowing that I'd be renting the equipment and I couldn't upgrade it or hack it and that I would be paying for this stuff in perpetuity. So I contacted DirecTV and asked them about the Lease and if I had the option of right-out buying out the equipment and they sent me their form letter responses.
Basically I have no choice but to lease and now I feel like we're back to the old AT&T days when you would rent their telephone receiver for decades overpaying for it hundreds times over. They also charge you a $199 first time fee that is not the purchase price of the item and then you still get charged $4.99 a month on top of a 2-year contract.
Additionally they broke their relationship with Tivo so their current DirecTV receivers do not come with the Tivo software and there are a few complaints about their current HD DVR receivers. They recently started working again with Tivo to build a new DirecTivo HD DVR receiver that might be available sometime in 2009.
After finding out all of this I lost interest in upgrading my DirecTV for HD content and after realizing the simple fact that I do not ever watch regular TV programming anymore, I did the only sane thing and cancelled my entire DirecTV service after being a 9-year customer.
Lately most of my entertainment comes from the computer and I subscribe to the serial shows that I like to watch (Californication, Entourage, Weeds, Stargate Atlantis, etc.) which is basically what the DirecTivo was doing for me previously.
PS: I wish that someone would also go after these companies and other service providers like mobile phone carriers for the 1 to 2 year lock-in contracts.
DirecTV Receivers
We have no need for these shitty things anymore. We're paying over $15 a month JUST FOR these HDTV cable boxes, and guess what? THEY DON'T WORK.
Half of the HD channels we are supposed to have fail to come in properly. (I suspect it's due to Concast's horrible compression ratios), so we're paying $15 a month, PLUS the charges for HD service, for poor quality, horribly compressed, hardly ever works HDTV.
I'd like to see another lawsuit concerning this...
I just torrent all of the TV shows I watch, copy them to my PS3, and watch them in HD anyway, so yeah.
Face it. The only person standing to make any money back out of this class action suit, is the suit!! The lawyer his/her self. Everyone else stands to collect nothing but a bunch of grief and hassle from all of this.
Why not approach it this way. You now know what you are up against. Nothing spells it more loudly than to disconnect from cable providers and go with alternatives; ie Dish Network, RCA, etc.. When they have to resort to out right lies on their advertising trying to get people to come back, then they get sued for false advertising to boot. They'll loose their market simply by loss of customers. Everyone knows already that Comcast's cable internet is a joke. They bring you in for $30 a month for 3 months, then you get zapped for $70 a month after that and for service that many times is not any better than DSL in download. Then ever notice how Comcast NEVER talks about upload speed??!!! There's a reason for that! My DSL has a fairly symmetrical 1.0mb upload to the download 1.5mb. Comcast will never ever talk about that. I can get up to 5Mb here on DSL and others can get even higher.
Comcast's TV has always been a joke and they haven't changed a thing. What makes them think after Feb 17th, I'm going to call them??? Their TV ads here all represent a concept to the consumer that there is no other alternative but Comcast when TV goes digital. I wonder why they haven't been called on the carpet for that.
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
Interesting point, I had to think about it for a while. Perhaps the fact the z10 is essentially the service whereas renting the settop box in not the service, but renting it is required to use their service.
Cheers !
If you were able to buy and use your own, you wouldn't go to the lowest bidder and buy the crap Scientific Atlanta makes.
Here in Belgium it's the same story. Telenet - which for 50% is owned by Liberty Global - that have a monopoly on cable television, started doing the same thing recently.
You can only rent their new set-top boxes and their boxes are the only ones available to watch digital cable television. They use DVB-C but they crippled it by using some kind of propriate DRM solution. The official explanation is that they only allow their own boxes to guarantee the stability of the cable network. It would be funny if it weren't sad that they try to scam consumers which such a ridiculous argument. Also that politician and most consumers let them get away with it
The official tune is that they only let people rent decoders because they are such a fuzzy warm company that "thinks at the consumer wallets". When letting consumers rent they don't need to buy "expensive" gear. The hilarious thing is that this tune is coming from a company that asks 50 euro just to get the thing working. They ask 50 euros to "active" (just flipping a bit) one (!) decoder. So if you have a household of 3 TV's you need to pay 150 euros just to get the decoders working.
There where some regions where there was another provider (in.di) that didn't encrypt the FTA channels and which you could pick up with any DVB-C decoder. Miraculously that company didn't have any problems with the cable network stability when they promoted and used more open solutions. Unfortunately that wasn't available in all regions and Telenet has taken over this company so the "good times" are over.
We don't have the possibility of class action lawsuits and politicians are selective deaf. They even rehash the same arguments about network stability, etc. When looking at the board of directors of this company you will notice that a lot of them are politicians... .
By "so they need a box" you mean "they need a box blessed by the RIAA, the CIA, and The Pope". Thus if your idea of "needs a box" includes only boxes with tamper proof screws and protocols that encrypt the signal all the way to the controller on the TV, you are in luck I guess.
Question. Does your fantasy world include my SageTV, or somebodies MythTV or Windows MCE? Will your fantasy world with leprechauns and gum-drop houses include cheap consumer hardware from Fry's?
Last I checked, if you want your SageTV to capture the high-def channels you pay $100/mo for, you are shit out of luck. Why? I guess we are thieves or something and will torrent it. Never mind the fact that I pay you guys a fortune for cable, you are the second highest bill I pay--right below rent.
While your fancy ass digital tuner gets your channel mappings and schedules for free, I have to rely on SageTV for the schedule (for free). Worse I have to figure out how to map what few ClearQAM signals I get into logical channels. I can't decode the encrypted QAM stuff that I pay $100/mo for because I guess I'm a criminal. Instead I have to thunk the majority of your content to crappy SDTV analog signals using your set top box and then recompress it on the analog tuner of my Hauppauge card.
And this is what scares you guys the most because it means your entire business model is about to be obsolete. The future doesn't need a cable company for content, only bandwidth. Nobody pays $100/mo for just bandwidth. I can go buy my streaming content from Amazon or Netflix. More likely the parent company of places like Discovery or History Channel will figure out they dont need you either and will offer ways to stream their content to my computer as well.
And you know what? The day I can get all my content directly over the internet will be the day you guys get screwed.
PS: You forgot to mention that only your set top box can do video on demand. Not even paying customers who use Tivo can use your OnDemand services. Ooops.
"Here's the deal. You're going to rent this box from us if you want our service. But we're your only local option aside from satellite. Who, also, will be happy to rent you this box. If you're caught with one that you aren't renting, lets say you bought one from ebay, you'll be charged monthly for it as well."
"But that's not fair."
"What's fair is what we say is fair, because no one's going to stop us. They did it before with CableCard and look what happened. Didn't work out so well, did it? Now they'll leave us to our own methods! Those boxes are soooo expensive anyway, no one would ever give us a 20% bulk discount. And we sure as hell aren't going to give you a discount, either, on the monthly fee."
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
I can't tell if you drank too much coffee or if you're failing at trolling. Either way your inflammatory tone and language detracts from your message.
Digital cable signals are encrypted so that people cannot easily steal cable from the cable company. Cable companies don't care if you download torrents or stream from NBC or steal satellite signals.
Video on demand services are exactly what I was referring to when I mentioned the future of television. Video on demand is an idea that isn't limited to cable. Satellite and internet companies are doing it too. Nobody has to use cable's on demand services. Folks can use whatever services they want. Or not. Up to you.
Nobody needs TV. TV is a luxury. I lived without it for 8 years and didn't own a TV before I started working for a cable company. Now I own a TV, get free cable, and mostly use my TV to play on my PS3.
My comments here are my own; I do not speak for my employer.
... the 'box' and the service are two separate contracts. Many people choose to purchase their own box, but most (like me) will simply take advantage of an offer from the provider which includes the box for 'free'. I know nobody who is explicitly renting their box. Of course it could be argued we all are without our knowledge, but then, that's how a smart business would operate - e.g. hide whatever costs were incurred from the box within the 'service' contract. It's so simple I'm amazed the stupid companies continuously expose themselves to such issues.
I dont think you fully understand the politics behind this.
I understand this, and that is fine. What I do care about is that currently it is impossible to use anything but "blessed" hardware to receive all but a few HDTV channels I pay for. Your cable card is great for Tivo's, which are "blessed", but right now you can't just throw together a computer and install SageTV/MythTV/Windows MCE and get the same channels.
Worse, there is no requirement for which QAM channels you can carry in the clear. You can throw the switch at any time and render the digital tuner in my HTPC even more useless than it is right now.
I could go on about how you can and do change the QAM channel mapping at will, but I wont...
This is slashdot, home of the flamewar. But honestly, the state of HDTV and the cable industry piss me off. The whole thing is a huge mess and I'm sorely tempted to put together a political action committee to lobby for change.
Hopefully we'll all just route around the cable company and stream content over the inter-web. If I was a gambling man, I'd be betting on that future.
And I know that there are many sides to the coin.
I know you are getting squeezed by the content producers who either want to play geographical "tricks" (i.e. opening ceremony of the Olympics + tape delay) or don't want their content on a torrent site. In many ways, your guys life would be easier if you didn't have all the fucking crazy encryption schemes, but the content guys wouldn't like that.
It pisses me off because I think the HDTV industry is still very immature. Too many resolutions and fucking who fucking decided to let each program have it's own aspect ratio!!!! Seriously, that is bullshit. Everything should be the same resolution and the same aspect ratio. Even if it isn't filmed in the same aspect ratio, the video signal should transmit the letterboxing too, not have my TV, in theory, switch resolutions and aspect ratios. Why? Theory and reality dont match and not all TV's will adjust the aspect ratio and instead just let the picture look like shit. And yes, I know that in theory the cable box should tell the TV about aspect ratios changing, but they don't, at least here in Seattle (comcast). Seriously, the aspect-ratio, resolution changing is bullshit and I was amazed this was a "feature". TV's shouldn't be treated like multi-resolution CRT's. They are fixed resolution, fixed aspect ratio devices and this is especially true with pixel-based systems like LCD's and plasma screens.
Then there are to many new acronyms (took a while to figure out how ATSC and QAM fit into the mix). To little integration between devices. Too little industry lore about what works and what doesn't.
Hopefully the transition in Feb. will get things maturing faster. I do hope, and think, that things will eventually settle down and I'll be able to buy a $80 QAM tuner from fry's that takes a Cable Card. And if not, Hauppague is just about to ship an analog tuner that will do real-time 1080i over component cables.
And honestly, I could to. The only thing that makes it worth while are DVR's like SageTV or Tivo.
And yes, I comskip the fuck out of what I record too (which I imagine is a very small minority, small enough the content companies dont care) I imagine the top slots for commercials these days are the ones that are those 5 second "this show brought to you buy Toyota" that are quick enough that you haven't picked up the remote.
Anyway, cheers and happy new year :-)
It is all bullshit. In the not-so-distant future, I predict we'll all be streaming our content straight from Discovery.com or MSNBC.com. My only fear is even that technology will have a lot of strings attached that will make it very hard for "unblessed" devices to use them. It was awesome how much of the Olympics were on NBC.com, but you know what? I never watched it because I watch that on my SageTV with a remote, not on my desktop computer. They also have a lot of content I'd like to watch like old Office episodes, but those too will only work through their web page. If they just published a podcast, I could watch them. Hell, they could load them up with commercials too because it is hard to skip around in streaming content.
We live in interesting times, that is for sure.
But I sure wish I could at least get a QAM tuner on a PCI card that has a Cable Card slot on it. Once I finally make the plunge to getting HDTV myself I'll probably use this cute little guy and route around the whole mess. But the problem with all those solutions is you are basically going from Digital -> Analog -> Digital when you can just record the feed right off the wire with no loss in quality. I'm also reading stories about how the some in the industry want to down-convert the analog ports to keep us evil criminals from stealing the content we pay for. And regardless, I need a set top box.
And yes, I rant and yet I don't have HDTV personally. Every time I look into what it will take to get HDTV + SageTV, I get pissed and give up. The SageTV is a requirement, the lady would kill me if I took that away (Tivo lacks this or this). The analog capture card gives me comfort though, even if it isn't ideal.
Rental is a better option for the various companies boxes. But what if you don't want their DVR?
Comcast's, DVR (hell, the whole set top interface) sucks horribly compared to other equipment I've used. The interface and show recording is so bad that I'd rather put the effort into programming one myself (including learning to program) than use theirs again. If I were forced to go back to them I'd want third party gear.
I'm in a similar boat right now with a DSL owned router that I have to pay for monthly, and which barely works, even though my wireless router supports PPPoA just fine.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
basically that cable coming into your house has a bandwidth of roughly 1GHz - that's a lot - way more than the bandwidth available to you from broadcast (which you're sharing with radio, hams, satellites, police, phones, etc etc) and it's lower noise, broadcast digital TV requires you to blow bandwidth on redundancy to handle the higher noise environment and other things like echos, while cable is a cleaner environment that can use more efficient coding techniques like qam256 (and qam1024 coming eventually)
So broadcast works for an environment with few channels (more now we're going digital) but still relatively few compared with cable
Many of the currently-installed CableCards probably could handle SDV just as well as the cable company's boxes do for the simple reason that many of today's CableCards are bi-directional/two-way. The problem you've run into is that TiVo is unwilling to make a two-way device so your TiVo is using the 2-way card for only 1-way traffic.
Not that I blame TiVo -- the company that owns the patent rights needed to make a CableCard device has been unwilling to grant licenses for any 2-way device that doesn't limit the user to a GUI designed by and downloaded from whatever cable company it's talking to. So TiVo had implemented a 2-way device (to make full use of the 2-way CableCards being installed) you wouldn't need Cox's Tuning Adapter but your TiVo would work and look on-screen exactly like one of Cox's own cable boxes. If you're like most people who bought a TiVo you bought it because of the way it works and not just to avoid paying a monthly rental to the cable company.
I believe the point was that slashdot is for tech comments, not political bantering.
What I'd like to see the Obama administration do is demand that the 200 billion already given to the telco's for 'universal broadband' be actually put into place. Force them to go forward with the plans they had originally stated before taking those billions of tax credits, fees, etc that they never delivered upon. If the monopolies are unwilling to play than force them to pay back their 200 billion to another entity that will do what was promised for that money.
Otherwise the universal broadband is just feeding more money to the telco monopolies. Going with a Universal Broadband sounds great but I only see it as a telco bailout, those big companies are just like all the other election donors with their hands out. Do a campaign finance search for every member of congress dealing with Telco in any fashion. They've loaded the deck to make sure they get their way.
I always did find the whole idea of renting or leasing such a device to be dumb, because honestly you are going to pay more overall than you will if you bought the device outright. They can just make you pay a rental or lease fee for as long as you have the service even if that is years and you would own it.
That is why if given an option, I purchase outright. My cable company tried to force me to buy a modem for my internet, I told them hell no, bought my own and when they left one for me to lease, I took it back and made sure they knew to remove the lease from the bill.
And what is also fun is that when you cancel the service, you have to give back the device you rented. What's to say they can't claim it got lost in the mail, or you missed some deadline to send it back and then you get charged a huge amount that is more than the device would even be worth? I've seen such things happen to customers. Its crazy what these companies get away with.
I would like to know how they run Comcast in California. I work for Comcast in Florida and they have had the option of cable cards for some time. I wounder if this is more of an issue of ignorance on the part of the customer or the sales rep she talked to that didn't properly explain their options.
Don't let schooling interfere with your education. ~ Mark Twain
Did I say that?
Comcast forces me to purchase into basic cable service and pay 20 dollars extra per month for it, even though I don't need it.. Then they limit my uproute connection for fear that somehow I might steal video content from them and sell it to people on the net.. I have a solution, sell me an Internet connection without the cable service, and permit me a greater uproute transmission rate, because I don't really care about TV.. It's nothing but mind control.
Just say no to license servers!!
OCAP/true2way is coming out already. Although the Panasonic TV is only available in a few markets so far. There are set top boxes in various stages of development from Motorola, Panasonic, Samsung, Cisco etc. They all work on the OCAP/true2way system(or will when they're finished being developed).
Once this is all rolled out, you will be able to go buy your set top box from any store and use it on a compatible network. COX is also going through this transition as is Time Warner and some smaller cable companies.
So, Comcast and many other cable companies are already moving away from this forced rental. I don't see what the court will be able to do to them since they're already transitioning away from it.
The fact that you'd be required to pay for support for 3rd party equipment WOULD be your problem. It is this way for every company.
cjacobs001
Aren't the signal providers sending proprietary code, in one form or another (signal,encryption, something?)?
In addition, many people are falling for Comcast's Triple Play package offer, which locks them into a single provider for most of their communications. If Comcast dominates, then it's only a matter of time before they control more and more of the content. That gives me visions of Big Brother, Fahrenheit 451, and Brian Roberts as Our Leader, with his image dominating the large screen in my living room.
Tech policy is very important for the country, and we should make sure that these issues do not get overlooked as we address the multitude of other issues facing us.
That's the question of the day. I guess I can see having the right to by a $350 piece of crap but why on earth would you want to? At least as it is now, the cable company will swap the boxes whenever there is a problem with it. If you buy it, it's yours. You own it. No more lifetime free replacements. Until the tru2way (OpenCable) boxes start coming out from Tivo, Panasonic, Sony, etc, I will hold off on doing anything with the Cox Cable box I'm currently renting. Cox will also swap-out your cable box instead of trying to service it on the spot. That would take too long. It also minimizes down time. The ability to buy your own cable box, and get ALL the on-demand/2-way features, etc is already in the works and on the way thanks to tru2way. I'm excited.
I don't have to pay for third-party support for my telephone. I don't have to pay for third-party support for my cable modem. I didn't have to pay for third-party support for my TV (when it was hooked directly to analog cable. So why the fuck should it be different for digital cable?!?!
It is nothing more or less than a damnable money grab and restriction on the user's freedom. There is no excuse!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
We need to nail these turkeys for every penny that they steal. Surcharges, irregular billing cycles, constant repackaging of services, and perpetual equipment rental fees are all a bogus rip off. Even worse, they penalize you for being a regular customer, and offer better rates to the street. This ethic must no longer be dealt with impunity. We need to assure there is some REAL competition in the market place or we make it a free service to all citizens. Perhaps fiber optics should be a public utility. Its time that our country award its citizens above its shareholders. Investors are "fair weather" friends, and have no commitment to "ownership" except for profit. Which is why your 401k accounts all got plundered. NO MORE RIP OFFS OR CORPORATE OBFUSCATION OR WE'LL JUST SHUT DOWN THE SCUMBAGS. I actually prefer LAWYERS to corporate thieves. At least lawyers show up to court.
Remember how smoothly analog TV (whether OTA or cable) worked? As long as your equipment was "cable ready," you didn't need any set top box at all. Cable just worked with your TV, VCR, or Tivo, and this was a highly desirable situation for everyone except those who sold/leased set top boxes.
But, with digital cable, we can't have that anymore. There's no such thing as generic "digital cable ready" equipment. There are approaches intended to roughly approximate it, but they fall short. They all rely on some "trusted" intermediary (cablecard or set top box) to work, except that whole point of being "trusted" is that it's supposed to not work too well. And the only way these intermediate devices can be trusted to not quite work, is if some centralized controlling authority owns or licenses them. It's simply impossible for these deices to exist without antitrust concerns.
As an analogy, look at DVDs: you can't (legally) make a DVD player without your product being tied to DVDCCA. DVDCCA has 100% marketshare of legal DVD players. With cable, the situation is more complex, but there's always be some central authority that cable service is tied to, with 0% of customers having an option to not be tied in, somehow.
IMHO, that party should always be attacked using whatever antitrust legislation we have (and they will always be vulnerable until they purchase a specific exemption, which they haven't done yet), and they should never be free of litigation. Their lawyers should be continuously spending half of the company's money while the other half is spent on fines. Push 'em until they don't exist. You'll know you've won when you can buy an uncrippled part and connect it to your MythTV box with full functionality.