DownLow
Nope...I Got Nothing
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Long Island
| Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR Anyone see this
»tech.yahoo.com/news/nm/20090629/···rt_dvr_1
Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it rejected an appeal by film studios and television networks of a ruling allowing a new digital video recorder service by New York cable operator Cablevision Systems Corp.
The justices refused to review a ruling by a U.S. Court of Appeals in New York that Cablevision's proposed new service would not directly infringe the copyrights of the media companies that produce movies and television programs.
(Reporting by James Vicini, Editing by Derek Caney)
--
Cleverly Disguised As A Responsible Adult! | |
|
 UnnDunn
Premium
join:2005-12-21
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR The thing is... who actually wants a network DVR, whose commercials one will not be able to skip? | |
|
 | TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
| Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR Why do you think they will not have the ability to do commercial skipping?
JMO The quick ruling should actually allow CV to do it without an agreement with the Entertainment companies. In that case they could have the same functionality as the stand alone and may even add multi-room viewing to fuel acceptance, since the Network DVR saves them money versus the stand alone.
In fact you can easily speculate they would want to add features to increase demand for the Network DVR. Also remember you really need to allow Fast Forward and Reverse for other reasons then commercial skipping I would think they will likely include it.
--
Warning, If you post nonsense and use misinformation and are here to argue based on those methods, you will be put on ignore. | |
|
| 
e2727
Bklynguy
join:2001-10-30
Brooklyn, NY | I am glad, don't want a network DVR that you can't skip commercials | |
|
| | RemyM
join:2005-02-14
Stamford, CT | Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR They can let it skip commercials now since its been determined it's no different then the current DVR. That was put out there as a way to settle the case but they don't need to do that now, they won. | |
|
| | |
e2727
Bklynguy
join:2001-10-30
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR Ok thanks for cleaning that up. now just wonder if it going to slow like VOD,that would be another reason i would not get it | |
|
UofMiamiGrad
Premium
join:2001-02-03
Great Neck, NY
| Are there any bandwidth issues with deploying this? I know Verizon & U-Verse use IPTV to push VOD, would that help CV save bandwidth? If having multiple households using N-DVR service would cause a bandwidth issue. Maybe it would help the responsiveness of the service as well. Curious to see deployment & pricing when it happens later this summer. | |
|
RemyM
join:2005-02-14
Stamford, CT
| Sounds like they still might try to work with them on ads. Probably by selling ads themselves. Also sounds like everyone will be able to pause live TV from any box even without ordering the service.
Cablevision Systems COO Tom Rutledge issued the following statement: "This is a tremendous victory, and it opens up the possibility of offering a DVR experience to all of our digital-cable customers. At the same time, we are mindful of the potential implications for ad skipping and the concerns this has raised in the programming community. We believe there are ways to take this victory and work with programmers to give our customers what they want -- full DVR functionality through existing digital set-top boxes -- and at the same time deliver real benefits to advertisers. This landmark case gives the cable industry, and Cablevision in particular, the opportunity to do something that our satellite competitors cannot do. We expect to begin deploying the first application of this new technology, the ability to pause live television when the phone rings, as a value-added benefit to our customers later this summer."
»www.multichannel.com/article/307···enge.php | |
|
SteveCVTech
@optonline.net
| I like the current DVR but the network service wil help to keep costs down for Cablevision since any hard drive problems are fixed on-site. It should theoretically cost less to customers and be more profitable to CV since most of the current fee barely pays for the device itself. Once implemented, it should be possible to watch recordings on any TV in the home as well as setting recordings over the net or phone. So to those promoting these features on FIOS or satellite, they lose their advantage. As for the commercials, I'm sure they'll stay. If they don't, other problems, challenges and backlash may arise from the channel providers instead of the movie makers. Commercials pay the bills after all. | |
|
| dougef
join:2004-08-27
Wilton, CT | Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR My main concern is the loss of the add-on external drive. I imagine I will have MUCH less storage capacity on the network DVR than on my current one with its external drive attached. | |
|
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY | If this allows cablevision to do away with their dvrs and lower costs and then put that money into making boxes better then i am all for this. You can still get a box from tivo if you want an hdd (or a media center pc which works very well also). | |
|
mws192
join:2007-09-11
Norwalk, CT
1 edit | said by dougef  :My main concern is the loss of the add-on external drive. I imagine I will have MUCH less storage capacity on the network DVR than on my current one with its external drive attached. They've hinted that they will allow you to add more storage space for an additional fee. I highly doubt it will be as cost efficient as an external hard drive. | |
|
| TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
| Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR said by mws192 :said by dougef :My main concern is the loss of the add-on external drive. I imagine I will have MUCH less storage capacity on the network DVR than on my current one with its external drive attached. They've hinted that they will allow you to add more storage space for an additional fee. I highly doubt it will be as cost efficient as an external hard drive. That was what I was thinking.
--
Warning, If you post nonsense and use misinformation and are here to argue based on those methods, you will be put on ignore. | |
|
limegrass69
join:2008-05-28
Cross River, NY
 ·Cablevision
| I don't think the home-based hard drive DVR is going anywhere in the near future.
It will be a nice second option for those who want the flexibility to watch recorded content on any box in the house.
I am concerned about Cablevision's repeated references to advertising. Unless they plan to give the service away for free, I would be offended by any additional advertising as a result of the RS-DVR. A paid subscription to a remote DVR should give me the same flexibility to fast forward that I have with a traditional DVR. | |
|
| TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
| Re: Supreme Court rejects appeal on Cablevision network DVR I certainly see that as a risk given their statements.
If I read their release correctly, they may initially be giving customers the ability to pause a program for free, which would be great for use on the boxes that are not DVRs.
--
Warning, If you post nonsense and use misinformation and are here to argue based on those methods, you will be put on ignore. | |
|
|
e2727
Bklynguy
join:2001-10-30
Brooklyn, NY | If it's not the same as the DVR or better that i have now, i don' want it, it's simble as that | |
|
|
|
|
