Posted on 09/22/2007 3:48:45 AM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
An antitrust lawsuit filed Thursday accuses leading programming, cable and satellite TV firms of colluding to only offer prepackaged tiers of bundled programs and refusing to sell programming a la carte.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California’s Western Division, seeks damages and an end to the bundling practices.
The plaintiffs are named individual subscribers of Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox, EchoStar and DirecTV, seeking to establish a class consisting of “expanded-basic” customers of those companies and Charter and Cablevision Systems over the past four years.
In the complaint, filed by Maxwell M. Blecher of Blecher & Collins in Los Angeles on Sept. 20, they’re suing those multichannel video providers and NBC Universal, Time Warner Inc., Viacom, Walt Disney Co. and Fox Entertainment, under the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Each of the programmer defendants owns TV programs and interests in one or more TV channels. The cable and satellite providers supply a “basic cable” bundled service that’s required to be purchased before a subscriber can access other tiers of service, the lawsuit says.
The complaint cites a Nielsen Media Research report that states the average cable subscriber pays for 85 channels he or she doesn’t watch in order to get the 16 channels he or she does watch. It also cites a poll, by the Associated Press-Ipsos, that found 78% of respondents would rather buy only the channels they choose themselves. And it cites a Federal Communications Commission estimate that consumers are charged about $100 million a year for channels they wouldn’t buy under an a la carte regime.
National Cable & Telecommunications Association senior VP of communications and public affairs Rob Stoddard said the organization, which represents cable operators and programmers, doesn’t comment on litigation that names companies within and outside NCTA. "However, our view of a la carte hasn't changed," he said. "Many government and private studies have found that mandated a la carte would lessen programming choice, decrease diversity in programming, and raise prices for most cable customers."
Parents Television Council endorsed the lawsuit. "On behalf of our 1.2 million members, we applaud the commencement of legal action which, we hope, will lead to the ability for cable subscribers to pick and choose – and pay for – only the cable networks they want," PTC president Tim Winter said in a statement.
Ever thought of reading a book?
I concur (Maybe Joseph Farrah-and some big donors) want to start one up?
This is the second bundling related post I've seen here in the last few weeks. Mathematically minded freepers might find the curiously timely Ponder This problem interesting. I found the solution unexpectedly thought provoking.
I have no satellite or cable, and won't have until they offer ala Carte at reasonable prices.
Or even the ability to own your own phone. That and there would still be a more than a few rotary dial phones left around.
Total waste of time. The plaintiffs should just use the TVs and STBs to block channels, create preferred scan lists of favorite channels (to avoid the 60 channels of junk), and use DVRs to capture only the shows they want to watch. It will cost a fortune for the companies to build and operate the billing system to completely unbundle all channels — and guess who will pay for that in the end, anyway?
I do not support the current monopoly, but unless it is broken up by law, then it isn’t going away. Trying to institute a pay per channel system IN THE CURRENT SYSTEM will most definitely mean higher prices for less channels.
Every single time that Congress has passed a law to change something in the cable industry has always resulted in higher prices. This will be more of the same.
Pinging the HDTV list - Latest DIRECTV news.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why Is DIRECTV Quiet About HDTV?
Subscribers are demanding answers on the upcoming high-def expansion.
By Swanni
Washington, D.C. (September 21, 2007) — DIRECTV this week missed an internal deadline for launching its much-anticipated High-Definition channel expansion, according to several sources.
The satcaster has been tight-lipped on the reason why. (Sources say it’s a minor but persistent issue with integrating customer accounts with the new channel lineup.) There has been no press release from DIRECTV stating an exact launch date or an explanation of what’s going on.
The lack of response from DIRECTV headquarters is stirring anxieties and causing speculation and rumors about the real cause of the delay.
This has led countless DIRECTV subscribers to call the satcaster’s Customer Service department with complaints and/or simple inquiries.
Additionally, many of those customers have filled Internet message boards with laments about why DIRECT couldn’t simply issue a statement explaining what’s going on.
The frustration is understandable. DIRECTV is planning to offer an unprecedented number of high-def channels (100 HD channels by year’s end; 70 HD channels in October, its web site now says) and people are getting anxious to see them.
But in defense of DIRECTV, the satcaster is in a tough position. Until it knows exactly when everything is ready for the first wave of new HD channels, it can’t issue a launch date. It will look foolish if the date can not be met.
Plus, any official confirmation of “technical difficulties” will just stir more rumors and speculation.
So, for now, DIRECTV has little choice but to wait for the problem to be resolved. And, unfortunately, so do its customers.
MY theory—somebody doesn’t like paying to receive the gay channel. I could exclude it, but don’t like having it part of the package I pay for.
National Geographic is currently testing on channel 9300 and Discovery is testing on 9301. Don’t know how long they’ll be up but it is a start.
I’ll be converting to HD (Pioneer Elite Pro 150FD) next month and I plan to stay with Dish Network. Not that it’s that great, but the alternatives (DirecTV and Comcast) are worse. Supposedly AT&T U-verse is coming to my area. Anybody here have experience with that system?
Comcast does not offer ESPNU at all.
What would you say to a store that required you to buy deodorant, shampoo, a loaf of bread, and feminine napkins, anytime you wanted just a tube of toothpaste.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.