RSS
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Cablevision For Depriving People Of Fox On TV
from the oh-please dept
It seems the whole retransmission fight in NY between Cablevision and Fox gets sillier by the day. After Fox accused Cablevision of pointing people to websites with unauthorized streams of various sporting events, Cablevision announced that it would reimburse anyone who ordered Major League Baseball's internet playoff package to watch the World Series (legally) over the internet. Apparently, that's not enough for some people, who have filed a silly class action lawsuit against Cablevision for not discounting their bills during the Fox fight. They're claiming this was a breach of contract, because it represents a "material change" to the service. I can understand why people are annoyed, but this certainly feels like yet another class action lawsuit which is just about lawyers trying to squeeze money out of a company, rather than any serious public concern. Adding weight to that claim is the fact that they're asking for a whopping $450 million -- saying that the customers are seriously harmed by missing Fox's "distinctive viewpoint in the political speech arena... just days before a critical mid-term election." Oh and, of course, being deprived of The Simpsons, Glee, and football and baseball are seriously damaging to the psyche. Or something like that.
Update: Surprise, surprise. Now it's coming out that the lawyer behind the lawsuit has long term connections with News Corp. going all the way back to when Murdoch first set up the Fox Network.
I have an app...
How My First Game Made $28,623
Marketing And Monetization Strategies For Free Apps
I’m looking for policy...
Developers On Patents: Ron Garret of Awun
Jon Potter: Software Patent Trolls Can Be Stopped By U.S. Patent Office And Congress
I have a business...
Why and How Developers Use Mobile Payments: Infographic
The Talent Wars: Today's Toughest Startup Challenge
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Whopping... not so much.
That being said, I think a lawsuit against either side (Fox or Cablevision) is foolish and a waste.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Whopping... not so much.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wasn't Fox that demanded Cablevision pay up or live without it?
If it ever comes out that this lawsuit was instigated by Fox that would not surprise me, maybe Cablevision should get those same people to also sue Fox for breach of contract.
In the end is all ridiculous but.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Whopping... not so much.
Cablevision should just put an amplified digital receiver in their cable boxes and have it pickup the broadcast channels from the air. If a customer complains that they aren't getting the channel Cablevision should put an antenna up somewhere in or on the house (could they use the cable as an antenna?). That will be cheaper than paying the ridiculous fees that the broadcasters' demand.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Whopping... not so much.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
This.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
What is so silly?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Give In
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Give In
Yes, people are stupid and easily led astray by the great Satan that is lawyer.
That is all....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Give In
Though I find it hard to believe that this came up on it's own without some prodding by a party that stands to profit either way.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I say we all sue for forcing cable companies to pay to rebroadcast FREE OVER THE AIR content.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
if ppl payed for a service that CV or any other company for that matter did not provide then THEY SHOULD BE LIABLE.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Fox is a major network. It makes up 20% of the Network coverage, not to mention all the various other channels that Fox provides. If Cablevision is now providing a reduced service, they should reduce the bill by an appropriate amount.
After all, if they were adding a bunch of channels, they'd expect you to pay more, so with a reduction in channels, shouldn't you pay less?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Updated..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Updated..
The term "distinctive viewpoint in the political speech arena..." was a dead giveaway.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is so silly?
Rebroadcast rights are a contractual corcern. Each cable company has a signed contract with each of the channels it carries. These contracts have built-in cost adjustments that allow for the broadcasters to offset tech/marketing/etc costs.
What these companies like FOX and viacom are doing is extorting cable companies to get much higher retransmit rate hikes than the contract allows for. (Example, the TWC: Viacom fight was TWC agreed to 12% increase, viacom wanted 42%) They extort the cable industry by saying "Give us x percentage more, or we will pull our channels" Then to pressure those companies, FOX and others broadcast propaganda that the cable companies are willfully dropping ther content. When those companies cave in, they pass those costs straight on to the consumer.
This is extortion, and the FCC/Government is starting to take a good look at the practice. God I hope they stop this shit in it's tracks.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is so silly?
This is extortion, and the FCC/Government is starting to take a good look at the practice. God I hope they stop this shit in it's tracks.
In this case, would strong competition in the cable market even solve it? I'm not sure that it would, and if not, what would the FCC be able to do? Setting prices is generally bad. I don't know, I'm just not seeing a solution really.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This seems like a Tea Party Tactic
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
"...Lawsuit Filed Against Cablevision For Depriving People Of Fox.."
};P
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
umm...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: umm...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: umm...
Comment by imbrucy, Oct 28th, 2010 @ 1:01pm
Comment by Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased), Oct 28th, 2010 @ 2:35pm
Comment by Rekrul, Oct 28th, 2010 @ 3:06pm
You're not even the first person who's been told that it's already been mentioned that other stations are involved.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is so silly?
The Cable co.s should not be punished for standing up against extortion.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Cablevision should call for Boycott
Then they should notify all the advertisers that paid millions of dollars to Newscorp to have their commercials aired are not reaching the total potential customer market that they contracted for. Perhaps those advertisers will apply pressure on Newscorp, forcing them to reconsider their current action against cablevision,and the cable/dish provider industry in general.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
The Real Issue
News Flash: Because we're the idiots who fund it!
If people would ever put their money where their mouths are, they'd stop attending and watching sporting events until these fat cats learn to deal with a smaller pie. The pie is too big. Lower salaries, lower prices...simple.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment