RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | About time
That 2003 "decision" was bought and paid for by the NCTA. Now the ball is back in the customer's court and there should be fewer 30-channels-for-$50 sweetheart deals forced on tenants. |
|
dcurrey
Premium
join:2004-06-29
 ·ViaTalk
1 edit | Yea so
Does this really change anything. Years ago we rented a house. Didn't have cable. The cable company would not touch it until the landlord signed some kind of agreement allowing them access to install lines on the house.
Couldn't they just deny installation. Of course if everything is done via wires in place this point is moot. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | The property owner or their agent has to give permission for the initial installation of the cable line (or satellite dish for that matter) for liability reasons. That has nothing to do with this ruling. |
|
dcurrey
Premium
join:2004-06-29 | Yes but they can maintain the exclusivity agreements just by denying anyone else access to install any additional equipment. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to dcurrey
This would still give you the ability to 'choose'
Cable
Telco
Satellite
Antenna/OTA
None
vs.
'prearranged' forced deal (you want rent - you end up with the deal that the cable/telco has structured with owner). Cable/Telco gets monthly service deal 'for life', Owner gets a few extra $$/month, renter has service - whether they like it or not.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
mobbo
join:2005-04-13
Denton, TX | Effective when?
When does this go into effect? I'm about to sign the lease on an apartment in the next month or so... does this mean my landlord will have to comply immediately or is there a deadline? |
|
truckjrt
@wamltd.com
| Nothing New
This ruling only upholds what has been in place for the past couple of years. Yes the resident now has choice if the owner will allow another provider on the property. However, the next major issue is who owns and controls the wiring.
Comcast or TWC may and can still legally have exclusive control and use of the coax, which can make it difficult for other providers to deliver their service to the resident.
Also if a PCO (Directv or Dish) is the only option at the property this ruling does nothing to eliminate their exclusive service.
What owners need is a cost effective way to deliver cable or video over IP without running new wiring. |
|
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| reply to mobbo
Re: Effective when?
said by mobbo  :When does this go into effect? I'm about to sign the lease on an apartment in the next month or so... does this mean my landlord will have to comply immediately or is there a deadline? It means that the landlord cannot sign exclusive contracts. It doesn't mean they must allow you to get service from any provider in the area.
It changes nothing for you, really.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to dcurrey
Re: Yea so
said by dcurrey :Yes but they can maintain the exclusivity agreements just by denying anyone else access to install any additional equipment. Then take that up with your landlord. Again, as RadioDoc noted, this has nothing to do with the ruling. |
|
60529262
join:2007-01-11
Chicago, IL
| reply to mobbo
Re: Effective when?
It means the landlord cannot force you to take whatever he's cooked up with the local cable outfit even if you don't want cable, but it does not force the landlord into allowing whatever you want to have installed. Two different things. The latter is covered by other rules such as the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act. |
|
pgeorger
join:2007-04-23
Buffalo, NY
| reply to mobbo
said by mobbo :When does this go into effect? I'm about to sign the lease on an apartment in the next month or so... does this mean my landlord will have to comply immediately or is there a deadline? To further the point, ask before you sign anything! We had a similar concern years back when I wanted to bring my satellite service with me. We purposely scouted out apartments with balconies to mount the dish and then were sure to ask if there were any restrictions on mounting a dish. We wound up turning away from a couple of places for consideration because they would not allow it. Make sure you're very specific about what you want and don't make any assumptions and you and your new landlord will coexist just nicely  |
|
jonlemnh
join:2009-05-27
Manchester, NH | Court Upholds FCC Apt. Exclusivity Ban
Court Upholds FCC Apt. Exclusivity Ban
Sorry, cable industry...
Sorry, cable industry...?????? FIOS and DISH have contracts w/buildings and land lords to so dont be biased |
|
nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY | They can have contracts, but they can't be exclusive.... |
|
CT3
@comcast.net
| reply to en102
Re: Yea so
said by en102 :This would still give you the ability to 'choose' Cable Telco Satellite Antenna/OTA None vs. 'prearranged' forced deal (you want rent - you end up with the deal that the cable/telco has structured with owner). Cable/Telco gets monthly service deal 'for life', Owner gets a few extra $$/month, renter has service - whether they like it or not. I think his point was it gives the property owner the right to choose and NOT the tenant. Most apartments say NO sat's they look ugly to begin with. Depending on what all is needed for the other providers to operate they may have another property owner does not want uglification issue I suppose. But at that point it seems like the company just needs to figure out how to do a PROFESSIONAL clean installation so... |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | FiOS?
Wouldn't Verizon really be installing something like VDSL with a fiber-to-the-node setup for most MDU's? Is there an ONT installed for each customer or is some other equipment being deployed? |
|
tomkb
Premium
join:2000-11-15
Avon, OH
clubs: | what's in it
what's in it for the landlord? |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to CT3
Re: Yea so
said by CT3 :
Most apartments say NO sat's they look ugly to begin with. That's the spin cable companies have been putting on satellite TV since it first appeared. They also dealt the same dirt on OTA antennas decades ago, lobbying homeowners associations, etc., to ban outdoor antennas.
However, it is now illegal for apartment building owners and homeowners associations to outright ban satellite antennas unless there is an equivalent option available. |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | reply to CT3
I think a majority of all tenants would be happier with a choice of services, while the property owners are happier with a kickback from the exclusivity deal. |
|
jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk
| reply to tomkb
Re: what's in it
What's in it for the landlord USED to be having the cable company cover the cost of all the wiring (in from the curb as well as to each unit) for the entire apartment complex. In exchange, the cable company got a 10 year (or whatever) exclusive contract to provide service on the property. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Cable back to the Courts
And Cable will go on to the courts again and see what they get the 2nd time.
They don't give up the first time, we all know that. Cable will be back and they'll move higher up until they get something done. |
|
