Search:  

 
theme to black backgroundlet page decide theme
HomeFind ServiceReviewsISP NewsFAQsForumsToolsDatabaseAbout 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Network DVR Court Fight Continues » Networks being inconsistent
Search Topic:
 Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
all about control »
« sigh  
AuthorAll Replies

Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

reply to Neyland
Re: Networks being inconsistent

said by Neyland See Profile :

I agree I just don't see what the difference is between having a box that records at my TV vs moving the 'box' to a virutal 'box' that exists at the head end.
The difference is the content providers want the for profit cable companies to have to obtain their permission.
to forum · permalink · · 2008-11-06 11:43:50 · Reply to this


Neyland

join:2003-02-04
USA

 Is this a matter of 10 people record 'LOST' so the network DVR records it once and grants all 10 people that had prior requests to recording access so this is considered a
rebroadcast?

It seems to me that this could be easily argued that because I as the end user are in control of both the record request and the playback, and I'm viewing for my private enjoyment in my home that the cable company is in fact not rebroadcasting, but rather simply acting as a storage median.
to forum · permalink · · 2008-11-06 12:23:43 · Reply to this

Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
said by Neyland See Profile :

It seems to me that this could be easily argued that because I as the end user are in control of both the record request and the playback, and I'm viewing for my private enjoyment in my home that the cable company is in fact not rebroadcasting, but rather simply acting as a storage median.
It could be argued that if I receive a broadcast station from the cable headend for my private enjoyment that the cable company is simply acting as my antenna. Whether I like it or not (and if retransmission consent agreements increase my bill I don't) the content providers ultimately won their argument against that in court.
to forum · permalink · · 2008-11-06 12:55:21 · Reply to this
-
Forums » Network DVR Court Fight Continuesall about control »
« sigh  

Thursday, 03-Dec 12:59:55 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [162] Comcast Releasing Promised Usage Meter
· [122] Avast Antivirus Has Gone Mad
· [103] Graduate Student Unveils Sprint's GPS Sharing With Feds
· [80] Latest Consumer Reports Survey Not Kind To AT&T
· [70] Baltimore To Ban Lazy Cable Installs
· [67] Comcast Makes NBC Universal Acquisition Official
· [63] Broadband Killed The Game Console
· [55] Rogers Unveils The ISP Dream Model
· [47] ACTA: Global Three Strikes
· [43] Cable Industry's 'Adoption Plus': Altruism Or PR Stunt?
Most people now reading
· False positive in Avast! or is it real? [Security]
· Warrior tank seem underpowered these days [World of Warcraft]
· [Rant] Disrespect of PTO [Rants, Raves, and Praise]
· [TWC] Audio/Video outage in Brooklyn [Time Warner Cable TV/Voice]
· Many Sites Unreachable [Rogers]
· Microsoft actively urges IE 6 users to upgrade [Security]
· [Rant] called out sick! [Rants, Raves, and Praise]
· Linux is terrorist - according to MS... [All Things Unix]
· Uverse + Wireless = TV in rooms with no cabling ! [AT&T U-verse]
· [Speed] modem upload channel type changed to docsis1 [Comcast HSI]