Insight into ESPN's thought process

[upstater]

I said they would knock out your TV, not your internet. Basic analog cable and internet are hardly the same signal. Your understanding of RF is far from accurate.

So, there are multiple signals in the cable and they haven't knocked one out? Because it's the same outlet I'm using (i.e. I don't have cable connected to anything but my router, unless I want SNY so I switch it).

 

[minidarren]

Exactly. TW would have to send someone out to your house to block out those signals. It most likely an error on their part that you are getting them. Or, TW doesnt find it worthwhile to roll a tech out to your place. I find that hard to believe since you are getting a service that they charge 23 bucks for a month.

 

[upstater]

Exactly. TW would have to send someone out to your house to block out those signals. It most likely an error on their part that you are getting them. Or, TW doesnt find it worthwhile to roll a tech out to your place. I find that hard to believe since you are getting a service that they charge 23 bucks for a month.

The same is true of literally everyone I know with internet only.

 

[minidarren]

Its bizarre from a company/money making standpoint, but I guess possible.

 

[upstater]

Its bizarre from a company/money making standpoint, but I guess possible.

Maybe they figure the vast majority of these people would just watch over-the-air HD, which is what I do now 99% of the time. How many times was UConn men's BB on SNY last year? That's how many times I watched basic cable.

 

[upstater]

By the way, about Pitt fan's contention that I'm stealing. I wonder what he thinks of slingbox. It's legal. But is it stealing?

 

[J187Money]

I think everyone is really off-base on thinking like the second paragraph. Removing the "bundle" does not automatically reduce revenue/spell the destruction of TV. People have an insatiable need for content. It is just that the revenue sources will become more varied and more personalized.

I currently spend $90 on TV/mo. If my bundle breaks up, I would definetly spend 50 on ESPN/SPORTS, $20 on a monthly UCONN network, $10 here or there for AMC/FX/HBO. The money will still be there to spend, it will just be encumbent on LAZY TV EXECUTIVES TO ACTUALLY WORK. you know, like other industries. Innovate, offer creative programming, compete for ACTUAL REVENUE.

The difference in this setup is that my money goes directly as patronage to the prodcuts/channels that deliver the content that interests me, making for a much more instructive, informative buying process. ESPN produces great content, so it has great, loyal subscribers.

Mystifying that people believe some networks wont absolutely make the change and thrive. and the ones that dont, them they will be replaced by new content providers.

too much doom and gloom. Every other industry I know of says " Change is good". Same applies for TV but for some weird reason everyone is scared of change.

In the long run, yes. Like the music industry adjusted after Napster. But it will take years, cost a ton of money and be completely disruptive to the ecosystem. They will be more prepared for this than the record companies were and I'm not arguing against it. But it will be painful for those that live inside that ecosystem.

 

[J187Money]

By the way, about Pitt fan's contention that I'm stealing. I wonder what he thinks of slingbox. It's legal. But is it stealing?

It is streaming content you already have rights to, so no it isn't.

 

[progrocks]

This thread is filled with some many people missing each others points....

7 years ago i got internet only from Time Warner for a place I moved into for the summer. Hooked up the cable line to the tv and i had basic cable. 1.5 years ago i went with comcast for internet only since I had Directv. It was cheaper getting a tv/internet package than just internet so I paid for the tv and never used it.

Not everything will go to streaming because the USA does not have the bandwidth to allow for that. And who would be expected to create the bandwidth? The same cable companies that will be f-ed over! Not going to happen.

 

[minidarren]

Sounds like it simply is not worth the time and effort for TW to send a tech out to trap out the TV service for their internet only customers.

Not every company does this as we frequently trap out TV service for internet only customers.

Good for you guys with TW.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[upstater]

It is streaming content you already have rights to, so no it isn't.

Presumably, anyone can use your slingbox account. One at a time though. Say, for instance, someone attaches multiple slingbox units inside their home and passes out their slingplayer IDs to several friends. Only one person is paying for service. Multiple people are watching.

 

[J187Money]

Then yes. Technically.

 

[upstater]

Then yes. Technically.

I'd like to see the law or contract on this. In fact, you can use Slingbox overseas! Unlike, say, Netflix or other streaming services. Slingbox is actually useful anywhere.

 

[J187Money]

I'd like to see the law or contract on this. In fact, you can use Slingbox overseas! Unlike, say, Netflix or other streaming services. Slingbox is actually useful anywhere.

http://www.slingbox.com/get/terms-of-use

Prohibits giving your password to a third party etc. very little risk but they have to cover their ass so the content owners don't go crazy.

 

[upstater]

http://www.slingbox.com/get/terms-of-use

Prohibits giving your password to a third party etc. very little risk but they have to cover their ass so the content owners don't go crazy.

I don't see the prohibition there. It sounds like boilerplate. It has nothing to do with the person who pays for cable. It has everything to do with the person setting up a slingplayer account. There's nothing there that says the slingplayer account person is the same as the cable account. This is why my original example was about multiple slingboxes in the same residence. Each slingbox can only be viewed by one person. Not multiple people. That's how they work. So if several individuals purchased multiple slingboxes, hooked them up, never revealed their passwords to anyone else, they wouldn't be in violation of slingbox's terms. Certainly not illegal anyway.

 

[UPitt]

Upstarter, use some common sense. Your example of purchasing slingbox for your friends is clearly unethical and stealing cable. Like J187money said, you agree to terms and conditions that state you will not share your password and will not use the slingbox to conduct illeagal activities.

Examples that clearly are stealing cable:

Direct theft by stealing cable from a neighbor. (using slingbox to receive a signal you do not pay for)
Theft by paying a third party for cable. (using slingbox to receive a signal and paying a third party for it)
Passive theft of cable (Upstarter proudly claims to be doing this, but only to see Uconn Woman bball)

 

[UPitt]

I don't see the prohibition there. It sounds like boilerplate. It has nothing to do with the person who pays for cable. It has everything to do with the person setting up a slingplayer account. There's nothing there that says the slingplayer account person is the same as the cable account. This is why my original example was about multiple slingboxes in the same residence. Each slingbox can only be viewed by one person. Not multiple people. That's how they work. So if several individuals purchased multiple slingboxes, hooked them up, never revealed their passwords to anyone else, they wouldn't be in violation of slingbox's terms. Certainly not illegal anyway.

Not sure of the exact terms of slingbox, but I believe the terms make reference to "not conducting illeagal activities". If so, you would be breaking the terms and agreement of slingbox and therefore they would have less or no liability to the cable company or yourself.

Using slingbox to distribute cable to third parties is clearly illeagal and is prosecuted. So your buddies would be breaking the law if they hook up slingbox to a third parties cable.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Upstater, do us all a favor and call Time Warner to see if they offer their Basic TV package free to any internet subscriber. I find it extremely difficult to believe that Time Warner doesnt care about the $22.75 that they would normally be charging someone for the basic TV subscription. Please also tell Time Warner that you are receiving those basic cable channels at your home.

Then please let us know how many days go by before Time Warner comes and out knocks your TV service out.

With this being said, I do not doubt that you are getting those channels. What I doubt is that you are getting them because they are included with your internet service. This simply is not the case.

http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/residential-home/internet/plans.html

The 64.96 price includes basic cable. It's a package.

 

[UPitt]

By the way, about Pitt fan's contention that I'm stealing. I wonder what he thinks of slingbox. It's legal. But is it stealing?

In my opinion, there is a lot of gray area surrounding cable and slingbox. Two basic arguments can be made:

1) The argument has been made that you purchase cable for a specific location and anyone visiting you or staying at that house can watch it. This happens at bars and hotels. The bar or hotel pays based on amount or seats or rooms.

2) The argument can be made that you have purchased the content and have the right to watch it, record it, or stream it to anywhere you are. Under this argument, you would pay for the rights to the media. That media can be watched by the purchasing owner (and friends with the media purchasing owner) on one devise at a time anywhere in the world.

I suspect that you would really need to read the terms and conditions of your cable contract to see what you have purchased. If a media legal expert can weigh in, that would be cool.

 

[Fishy]

By the way, about Pitt fan's contention that I'm stealing. I wonder what he thinks of slingbox. It's legal. But is it stealing?

You're definitely stealing.

 

[whaler11]

Upstater isn't stealing. It's part of the offer. He's wrong about TNT and TBS being free. They would become expensive a la carte - they have huge contracts w MLB, NBA and NCAA. Their fee is low because it's covered by 100 million subs each.

ESPN is $6 on a 100 million homes. It's pretty easy to see how expensive that becomes a la carte. My comcast bill $137 with 3 HD DVRs and all the premium stations. There is no way you get that a la carte at that price.

If you like sports and want a la carte you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[upstater]

You're definitely stealing.

Have you read the thread? TW does this with all its customers. Others have chimed in.

 

[upstater]

Upstarter, use some common sense. Your example of purchasing slingbox for your friends is clearly unethical and stealing cable. Like J187money said, you agree to terms and conditions that state you will not share your password and will not use the slingbox to conduct illeagal activities.

Examples that clearly are stealing cable:

Direct theft by stealing cable from a neighbor. (using slingbox to receive a signal you do not pay for)
Theft by paying a third party for cable. (using slingbox to receive a signal and paying a third party for it)
Passive theft of cable (Upstarter proudly claims to be doing this, but only to see Uconn Woman bball)

As usual, you can't read.

The password is a slingbox account password, not a cable password. Slingbox is not illegal. And it's clear you don't even know what slingbox is since there is no payment to any third party. Not only that, but you don't even know what SNY shows!

 

[Fishy]

Call Time Warner and thank them for the free cable.

Then, turn the television on and count down from 10....

 

[upstater]

Not sure of the exact terms of slingbox, but I believe the terms make reference to "not conducting illeagal activities". If so, you would be breaking the terms and agreement of slingbox and therefore they would have less or no liability to the cable company or yourself.

Using slingbox to distribute cable to third parties is clearly illeagal and is prosecuted. So your buddies would be breaking the law if they hook up slingbox to a third parties cable.

Again, you don't get it. The slingbox account holder is the first party. They own the slingbox and the slingbox account.