CUT-THE-CABLE.COM

May 27, 2009

Court of Appeals Upholds FCC Ruling Against Exclusive Cable Deals

Chalk one up for the consumers!  Read all about it at Boston.com The FCC voted in October 2007 to cancel exclusive agreements between cable companies and apartment owners, opening the way for competition from other service providers. The National Cable & Telecommunications Association (i.e. COMCAST) appealed, saying the agency had exceeded its authority. Yesterday, the [...]

Chalk one up for the consumers!  Read all about it at Boston.com

The FCC voted in October 2007 to cancel exclusive agreements between cable companies and apartment owners, opening the way for competition from other service providers. The National Cable & Telecommunications Association (i.e. COMCAST) appealed, saying the agency had exceeded its authority.

Yesterday, the US Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the FCC.  The FCC rule bars cable companies from enforcing current exclusive-access deals, or making new ones, in residential buildings such as apartment houses and condominiums.  There it is folks!  If you live in an apartment or condo and have been stuck with Comcast because that is who the Property Management company signed up with, you now have the GREEN LIGHT to shop for an alternate provider!

“Contracts helped building owners get lower prices and better service (HA HA HA) from cable companies”, said Betsy Feigin Befus, a vice president with the National Multi Housing Council, a Washington-based trade group representing the apartment industry (who is obviously in Comcast’s pocket) that took part in the case.  “The FCC took away an important incentive for cable firms to negotiate.” 

Betsy Befus been BEAT!  She better begin belting down Bailey’s at the bar.  Bigger bucks from Comcast’s “Back-Slapping” budget wont budge Big Brother.  Bye-Bye b-b-b-Betsy.

 

May 19, 2009

Comcast Slapped with Anti-Trust Class Action Suit

Read the news at HuntingtonNews.net Gordon Ramey II has filed a federal anti-trust complaint against Comcast due to mandatory rental fees for “cable box” or “set-top-boxes,” which are mandatory to view premium and/or digital cable.  The suit alleges that the company’s actions constitute an unlawful tying arrangement resulting in an impermissible restraint of trade. Due [...]

Read the news at HuntingtonNews.net

Gordon Ramey II has filed a federal anti-trust complaint against Comcast due to mandatory rental fees for “cable box” or “set-top-boxes,” which are mandatory to view premium and/or digital cable.  The suit alleges that the company’s actions constitute an unlawful tying arrangement resulting in an impermissible restraint of trade.

Due to a monopoly in cable markets and its dominance in the industry, the company’s “sufficiently strong economic power” , cable box competitors have “little motivation” or are “foreclosed” from entering the market, since Comcast which has more than 50% of the cable market.

Ramey’s attorneys allege that the cable provider purchases the boxes from Motorola or Scientific Atlanta “at a fixed and low cost… only to turn around and rent the same boxes to the class (for a hefty profit) with full knowledge that members of the Class have no choice but to pay the rental fees.”

A Comcast spokeman wants to say “Bring it on!  We’ll tie this up in the courts for 20-years and out-spend you into the ground.  By that time, set-top boxes will be gone and customers will be forced to buy Comcast-branded TV sets”

April 24, 2009

Comcast Takes the PUBLIC out of FCC Public Hearing

Here’s a real winner that you can read at Portfolio.com On Monday April 20th, Comcast was the subject of a FCC hearing on network neutrality at the Harvard Law School in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  The hearing was held to address complaints leveled by Free Press, Public Knowledge, the web-video company Vuze, and others, that Comcast is trying to [...]

Here’s a real winner that you can read at Portfolio.com

On Monday April 20th, Comcast was the subject of a FCC hearing on network neutrality at the Harvard Law School in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  The hearing was held to address complaints leveled by Free Press, Public Knowledge, the web-video company Vuze, and others, that Comcast is trying to stifle competition by blocking the delivery of rival video-on-demand services over its cable system.

Comcast ‘stacked the deck’ by packing the room with local employees, and admits that they PAID NON-EMPLOYEES TO ARRIVE EARLY AND HOLD A PLACE for Comcast personnel.  But then they try to tell us that these PAID SHILLS decided to stay and take up seats and oxygen in the room which resulted in hundreds of legitimate would be attendees being turned away.  Here are some of the RINGERS.

Comcast SHILLS at FCC 'Public' Hearing - 04/20/09

Comcast SHILLS at FCC 'Public' Hearing - 04/20/09

A number of people in the audience wore yellow highlighter marking pens on their shirts or jackets to identify them to Comcast employees coordinating the company’s appearance at the event. Comcast admits that they coordinated the employees that it brought to the hearing.

So, what exactly is Comcast so worried about?  Could it be that they feel that the FCC might actually listen to the PUBLIC? 

Comcast spokeswoman Jennifer Khoury wishes that she said “Those guys that are sleeping over there…they don’t belong to us.  Now that guy on their LEFT wearing the leather jacket that is staring down the camera man with a look that says ‘If you snap that picture I’ll feed your liver to my doberman’…now THAT’S OUR GUY, so quit asking me questions and don’t F*&K WITH COMCAST.”

April 7, 2009

Comcast is Locking Football Fans Out

Read this article from the CEO of the NFL Network, Steve Bornstein at The Philidelphia Inquirer. “Starting May 1, Comcast will stop carrying the network – denying fans the unique access and special coverage of the NFL that only NFL Network delivers.” “Comcast wants to continue to limit access to the network by charging consumers [...]

Read this article from the CEO of the NFL Network, Steve Bornstein at The Philidelphia Inquirer.

  • “Starting May 1, Comcast will stop carrying the network – denying fans the unique access and special coverage of the NFL that only NFL Network delivers.”
  • “Comcast wants to continue to limit access to the network by charging consumers extra for it. Comcast collects this extra charge to provide NFL Network as part of its sports package.”
  • “Comcast refuses to reach a new agreement with NFL Network that would make it available to a larger number of subscribers without the extra monthly fee.”
  • “Comcast discriminates against networks such as ours because we are independent. “
  • “Instead of negotiating with independent programmers, the cable companies discriminate against them in favor of their own services.”
  • “In October, the Federal Communications Commission’s Media Bureau ruled that we had shown that Comcast discriminated and retaliated against NFL Network. The bureau ordered an administrative-law judge to conduct additional proceedings.”
  • “We hope that Comcast will act responsibly, negotiate with us in good faith, and keep the best interests of the fans in mind.”

We hope so too, BUT IT JUST AINT GONNA HAPPEN.  Comcast is happy to keep the best interests of the fans in mind…for a HEFTY FEE!

March 20, 2009

FCC Chair recommends that COMCAST BE PUNISHED

Read the article at reason.org Comcast is in the hot seat for BLOCKING INTERNET TRAFFIC when it throttled down the BitTorrent protocol.  Maybe the CEO of Comcast should consider running for GOVERNOR now that he has experience (-;

Read the article at reason.org

Comcast is in the hot seat for BLOCKING INTERNET TRAFFIC when it throttled down the BitTorrent protocol.  Maybe the CEO of Comcast should consider running for GOVERNOR now that he has experience (-;

March 17, 2009

Comcast BUSTED for blocking peer-to-peer traffic

Read the full story from PC World The bottom line is that until the FCC regulations catch up with the state of the art and there is no distinction between voice and data, these shenanigans will continue.

Read the full story from PC World

The bottom line is that until the FCC regulations catch up with the state of the art and there is no distinction between voice and data, these shenanigans will continue.

« Newer Posts

Powered by WordPress