Is it too late to start writing to the FCC?

[tvmaster2]

Looks like the cable co's are suffering so badly that they need us all to rent converters for ALL channels. Forget the 50% avg. fee increases they have implemented in the last 5-10 years, since it's likely all of our salaries have gone up by 50% in the same period, no?

Woe is them

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...Basic_Tier.php

Is it time to start reminding the FCC just whose rights they are supposed to be protecting?

[OneThomas]

This is SO frustrating. Just another example of the Cable industry using the "digital transition" to make a buck off people. We paid a bit more for "cable ready" televisions and vcr's befor the digital transition so we could use our equipment without clunky cable boxes. Now, we have digital televisions capable of tuning QAM as a standard - the equivalent of the "cable ready" TV's of the pre-digital world. Not sure why the rules should suddenly change in the digital world and the consumer can no longer take advantage of "cable ready" devices, just because it is so much easier now for cable companies to control absolutely everything with a set-top box. This kind of crap is exaclty why I am trying very hard to stay away from cable or satellite service (5 years and counting thanks to Hauppauge, Silicondust and SageTV). As long as OTA Digital is available, and I can pick it up - cable or satellite won't ever get my money. Especially as long as cable companies are allowed to gouge customers like this. We stopped paying for each and every phone jack and telephone on a land-line, what - almost 30 years ago? Why should cable get to charge us for every room or device I use their basic non-premium services/tier in?
Ugh... Enough venting I guess!

[BobPhoenix]

One word answer: YES!

If the FCC started doing their job that would be government regulations and we can't have that any more!

[tvmaster2]

The FCC is made up of five commisioners, only three of which can be from the same political party.
With these pro-cable concepts, I wonder what the current make-up is.

http://www.fcc.gov/leadership

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC

regardless of their current leanings, I have sent my complaint.

[Fuzzy]

Its my personal opinion that the FCC should have no jurisdiction over private cable companies. If you don't want the product your cable company is selling, don't buy it. You can get TV without a decoder box with any TV made in the last 5 years with just an antenna.

[ke6guj]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Its my personal opinion that the FCC should have no jurisdiction over private cable companies. If you don't want the product your cable company is selling, don't buy it. You can get TV without a decoder box with any TV made in the last 5 years with just an antenna.

I would agree with you when I have multiple cable companies available to me to choose from. But when my local CC has a monopoly in my area, then I don't have the choice to choose a different CC that does have hte product I want.

[tmiranda]

Originally Posted by ke6guj

I would agree with you when I have multiple cable companies available to me to choose from. But when my local CC has a monopoly in my area, then I don't have the choice to choose a different CC that does have hte product I want.

There are two satellite companies as well as various streaming options. There is only one cable company in my area and what I think they have a monopoly on is internet access since I have no other viable high speed options.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by ke6guj

I would agree with you when I have multiple cable companies available to me to choose from. But when my local CC has a monopoly in my area, then I don't have the choice to choose a different CC that does have hte product I want.

It is still an optional service, and the FCC has no business meddling in the cable co's affairs.

[Ender]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

It is still an optional service, and the FCC has no business meddling in the cable co's affairs.

Your assertion may be true, but.....

During the OT digital changeover the cable co's went out of their way with a marketing campaign, which as I can recall, stated with cable no new boxes would be needed. Now that the masses, with their short attention spans they wish conveniently forget that claim.

In the more than 20 years that I have had a cable account I have been able to wire my home however I saw fit, and have as many outlets I wished to have at no extra charge from the cable company.

Now if this goes through, it will be an inconvenience, and make a few oft venues for tv watching used will no longer be available to me without some major modification.

[tmiranda]

IMHO the cable companies are where the music industry was several years ago: more worried about piracy than providing a service in a manner the consumer wanted. It didn't turn out well for the music stores, and it may not turn out well for the cable companies. As I said a few posts back, my biggest concern is that streaming becomes a viable alternative to cable and then my cable company turns around and charges me more for all the bits they are carrying.

As a side question - Do any TV manufactures make sets that can accept a cable card directly? If they did, and if the cable companies provided the cards at little cost (which may not be likely) the cable guys could still claim you don't need a box.

Last thought - Any chance the channels would not be encrypted? That wouldn't be too bad for us PVR types since there are several good M-Card tuners out there.

[Fonceur]

Originally Posted by tmiranda

Any chance the channels would not be encrypted?

You probably mean that they wouldn't be "copy once/never", as cable co dropping Clear QAM is the whole point of this thread...

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Ender

Your assertion may be true, but.....

During the OT digital changeover the cable co's went out of their way with a marketing campaign, which as I can recall, stated with cable no new boxes would be needed. Now that the masses, with their short attention spans they wish conveniently forget that claim.

In the more than 20 years that I have had a cable account I have been able to wire my home however I saw fit, and have as many outlets I wished to have at no extra charge from the cable company.

Now if this goes through, it will be an inconvenience, and make a few oft venues for tv watching used will no longer be available to me without some major modification.

Don't take their claims out of context. They were stating, at a time that many were concerned about the digital transition, that their systems are unaffected by the transition. If you had a working cable system, you would not have to do anything to keep watching your tv. This statement was to show the contrast of their customers situation to those who were getting OTA, many of which DID need to get boxes to continue their tv watching capabilities (or, obviously, have an ATSC capable TV). They were 100% correct at the time, as their customers didn't need to do anything.

Are you of the opinion that businesses are not allowed to change directions? Do you feel that once they make a statement in a given context, that statement can be used 2-3 years later, in completely difference context?

You have no service contract with the cable company, and as such, can walk away any day you choose to. If enough of their current customers were that upset by this, they all would have done so. The fact that they don't, indicates that your opinion is not shared by more than a very small part of their customer base, and I'm guessing they would barely notice you leaving.

I'm not saying you are wrong in being upset. it does suck that something you once were able to do you now can't... sucks... get over it and focus your energy on something you CAN change.

[wayner]

Originally Posted by tmiranda

As a side question - Do any TV manufactures make sets that can accept a cable card directly? If they did, and if the cable companies provided the cards at little cost (which may not be likely) the cable guys could still claim you don't need a box.

They used to but for some reason they stopped doing this a few years back. I don't know why since it is a great concept.

But Canada is much worse than the US on this front as the Canadian equivalent of the FCC, the CRTC, has absolutely no cojones. You can't get a CableCard in Canada and the CRTC won't do anything about it. CGMS-A protection can break recording in some apps but it doesn't matter since this concept doesn't exist in Canada. There is no requirement for cable cos to provide firewire on their boxes, etc.

And there is more vertical integration in Canada as the satellite companies (Bell and Shaw) and the largest cable company (Rogers) own the bulk of the TV channels - both OTA and cable channels. These guys also now own all of the sports teams in Toronto so they control the full value chain of the content, particularly for sports.

[tmiranda]

Originally Posted by Fonceur

You probably mean that they wouldn't be "copy once/never", as cable co dropping Clear QAM is the whole point of this thread...

When I first glanced at that article I thought they were talking about eliminating analog and going all digital. I went back and now I see the implications. They want to encrypt everything, not good

[Ender]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Don't take their claims out of context. They were stating, at a time that many were concerned about the digital transition, that their systems are unaffected by the transition. If you had a working cable system, you would not have to do anything to keep watching your tv. This statement was to show the contrast of their customers situation to those who were getting OTA, many of which DID need to get boxes to continue their tv watching capabilities (or, obviously, have an ATSC capable TV). They were 100% correct at the time, as their customers didn't need to do anything.

You may be correct here, and their message was as such, but in my informal research the impression left by the advertising campaign was just as I stated it by the large majority of those I asked.

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Are you of the opinion that businesses are not allowed to change directions? Do you feel that once they make a statement in a given context, that statement can be used 2-3 years later, in completely difference context?

The cable companies have not changed their course in decades, the cost of service just keeps going up, as is evident by the notice I received in the mail
stating my service will go up another eight dollars per month in February.

As for the contextual issue, it was seen that way 2-3 years earlier, and is still applicable today.

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

You have no service contract with the cable company, and as such, can walk away any day you choose to. If enough of their current customers were that upset by this, they all would have done so. The fact that they don't, indicates that your opinion is not shared by more than a very small part of their customer base, and I'm guessing they would barely notice you leaving.

I'm not saying you are wrong in being upset. it does suck that something you once were able to do you now can't... sucks... get over it and focus your energy on something you CAN change.

Yes, at this time I am not contractually obliged to stay with the cable company. the issue I have is that there is no other service that effectively competes, or has the features needed to satiate the needs of my family. My step father will not watch anything but premium movie channels, my mom prefers the simplicity of just turning on the television and just watching TV. Then there is the question of the investment i have in tuners that will be next to unusable to unstable ASTC reception.

As already stated in this thread the cable companies are too afraid of the bogeyman that is piracy, and are overreacting to protect their revenue stream.

All this being said, I have been under no allusion that the situation would not change, unfortunately things always seem to go from bad to worse these days.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Ender

You may be correct here, and their message was as such, but in my informal research the impression left by the advertising campaign was just as I stated it by the large majority of those I asked.



The cable companies have not changed their course in decades, the cost of service just keeps going up, as is evident by the notice I received in the mail
stating my service will go up another eight dollars per month in February.

As for the contextual issue, it was seen that way 2-3 years earlier, and is still applicable today.



Yes, at this time I am not contractually obliged to stay with the cable company. the issue I have is that there is no other service that effectively competes, or has the features needed to satiate the needs of my family. My step father will not watch anything but premium movie channels, my mom prefers the simplicity of just turning on the television and just watching TV. Then there is the question of the investment i have in tuners that will be next to unusable to unstable ASTC reception.

As already stated in this thread the cable companies are too afraid of the bogeyman that is piracy, and are overreacting to protect their revenue stream.

All this being said, I have been under no allusion that the situation would not change, unfortunately things always seem to go from bad to worse these days.

It has already been mentioned that there are 2 different sat providers in the us as well. You DO have options. I'd note that overall, the price of sattelite per channel has actually dropped over the years. Yes.. you will have boxes.. but if you are a sage user, the source really doesn't matter...

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by tmiranda

When I first glanced at that article I thought they were talking about eliminating analog and going all digital. I went back and now I see the implications. They want to encrypt everything, not good

thanks for reading the article, as encryption IS the key here....which is why Hauppauge were the ones pushing this story.

This isn't some Libertarian rights issue, it's an issue about free, personal recording disappearing in the United States.

And even the CRTC wouldn't let that happen in Canada, where privacy laws are much more slanted towards the individual, and not the corporation.

In the U.S., the cable cos DO have a huge monopoly on those telephone poles.
I completely support the FCC "meddling" in my business, if it means I maintain the right to record and view state-of-the-art signals for private use, without having to pay an ever-escalating fee structure I don't control.
Just think; a home with six cable drops, at $5 minimum per cable box, would up your bill by $30 month, and strip your right to record un-encrypted programming.
Yikes!
At least in Canada, you can PURCHASE your receiver/DVR, and then it's yours, no monthly fees.
To say that the FCC shouldn't meddle is naive, since the cable company's lobbyists are meddling BIG TIME. The people need balance.

[Fonceur]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

And even the CRTC wouldn't let that happen in Canada

Actually, as was pointed out before, Clear QAM or CableCard were never available in Canada (except for a few cable co here and there), so they couldn't take away what we never had... The CRTC is just a big corporate welfare institution, it doesn't care about us lowly customer...

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

In the U.S., the cable cos DO have a huge monopoly on those telephone poles.

Also realize that everytime one of these 'monopolies' has come to court - the monopoly being right-of-way granted to an exclusive entity - it has been struck down. There is nothing preventing another cable company from running their lines on those same poles aside from market forces. In areas with enough market demand, there ARE multiple cable providers. My brother can choose between 3 different high-speed ISP's (AT&T UVerse, Verizon FiOS, or Charter Cable), and 5 different tv providers (AT&T Uverse, Verizon FiOS, Charter Cable, DirecTV, or Dish Network) Along with this he also ends up having 3 options for home phone. There is also free city-wide wifi he could use if he so chose. It's at the stage now where it matters more where you live than any regulations in place. There are no FCC regulations forcing him to have these options, and no regulations even allowing it to happen. It's all a matter of market demand. If the market on a whole is happy with what is being provided, there is no force to draw a competitor into the area.

[tmiranda]

I stick by my assertion that the cable companies are within their rights to make it difficult for us to record what they provide over their cables. Yes, I know all about the "personal use" issues that were decided back in the VCR days, but nowhere was it stated that the broadcasters had to make it easy for us to record their shows, only that we were allowed to record them if it was for person use.

I don't like it, but it's still within their rights. As consumers, it's our right to vote with our wallets. There are alternatives to cable companies.

As an entrepreneur and business person I find it disheartening that if you make a product or service that becomes so popular that people think they can't live without it or it's their right to get it for free or use the service in ways you do not support, your reward is to have the Federal government take over your company via regulations. Not to mention that you are suddenly vilified as evil and "not paying your fair share". I know many successful, wealthy people and none of them are criminals or obtained their wealth by cheating or stealing. They all pay enormous taxes as well. (And I spend a lot of time helping them to find ways to lower those tax bills and pass on that money to their kids without paying 55% in taxes ) Almost all of them became wealthy by starting a company with their own money, taking big risks, and working really hard for a long time.

The cable companies can run their business in any way they see fit. If I don't think it's worth the money I won't buy their product. Sorry if my views are unpopular but it's how I feel about it.

And I wonder if anybody sees the irony in me making this argument while giving away loads of software for free