12 ms·
AT&T blacks out HBO, Cinemax for Dish, Sling TV users over carriage dispute
- colechristensen 8y agoI am more and more certain that there need to be strict legal blocks to the vertical integration of content production, content distribution, and Internet/network services. Nobody wins when any of these three can be owned by the same interest.
- munk-a 8y agoI think this is more a question of enforcement then a requirement to actually change any laws. This merger was approved when it clearly shouldn't have been.
- tuna-piano 8y agoThe government tried to stop it! And the government was forced to make their case in court, but the government lost and ATT won. The government is now appealing. How would you design an alternate system? Government gets to decide with no recourse for the company to make their case?
- craftyguy 8y agoCourts are too OP. Un-elected officials with 0 accountability getting to override legislation put forth by elected officials seems silly. I don't know what the 'right' system is, but the current one allows for situations like the one in the article to be perfectly OK and, IMHO, is broken.
- jonathankoren 8y agoAn independent judiciary with judicial review of laws is a cornerstone of an effective democracy that ensures minority rights. Judges are accountable. You just have to impeach them.
- craftyguy 8y ago> ensures minority rights. Except when they don't, like in the case of the 'muslim ban' and the specific case here with the creation of a new monopoly.
- jimbokun 8y agoThere was a lot of judicial push back on the Muslim ban. Pretty sure they forced the Trump administration to make significant changes to it before it could be enforced.
- wpasc 8y agoUS anti trust enforcement often looks at consumer harm (which seems to focus on immediate obvious harm, or lack thereof). So adjusting the law such that the anti trust rules are stricter. The massive consolidation in soo many US industries I think has done a large disservice to the country and long term prospects for the economy by massively reduced competition
- ethbro 8y agoAgreed. There's a lot to be said for deciding anti-trust also on the basis of harm to potential new entrants to the market.
- basch 8y agoThe law isnt built for modern companies. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-parado...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- derefr 8y agoPerhaps, beyond a given company size, mergers+acquisitions should be considered illegal until proven legal (i.e. the burden of proof should be on the merging companies.)
- dragonwriter 8y agoWith a preponderance of evidence standard as the US uses for civil cases, who bears the initial burden of proof really should only matter in the case where neither side can present substantial evidence, since of there is conflicting evidence, the winner should be the same either way.
- babypuncher 8y agoThe courts believed that the merger would not be a problem with our current anti-trust laws. The governments response should be to pass stricter laws that address the concerns of the court.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- ur-whale 8y ago>I am more and more certain that there need to be strict legal blocks Sure. More regulation. Just what we need. Well known to solve every problem known to man.
- VikingCoder 8y agoSmarter regulation is better than dumber regulation. And some things need regulation. You're engaging in a slippery slope argument, and I hope no one buys in to your point of view.
- matchbok 8y agoMost of the time, the only people who complain about regulation are big-money corporate interests and those who are too uninformed to reason otherwise.
- Matticus_Rex 8y agoWhile I agree that both those groups complain about regulation, people who study the effects of regulation also complain about regulation because there's a large literature on how counterproductive many intuitive-seeming types of regulation actually are.
- mijamo 8y agoMany people who study the effect of regulation SUPPORT regulation in general, and shows its bad effect in a few cases.
- rayiner 8y agoLots of ordinary people complain about regulation. One of the top stories on HN right now is a StrongTowns article. What do you think it’s complaining about? The whole new urbanism movement is a reaction to decades of bad regulation. Bad regulation hurts consumers. Ticket prices plummeted after airlines were deregulated. FedEx and UPS and (eventually) Amazon sprang to life after freight was deregulated. Conversely lack of regulation has enabled great products. Restrictions on vertical integration, for example, would have precluded the most popular mobile phone product lines on the market (Samsung Galaxy and Apple iPhone).
- AndyMcConachie 8y agoCongratulations. We've reached a level of understanding that Americans took for granted in 1890.
- marshray 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil
- Joeri 8y agoFascinating about that history is how splitting up standard oil was lucrative for rockefeller, as the combined income of the smaller companies was larger than of the single monopolist. If more of these acquisitions occurred as mere ownership of competing entities instead of trying to roll them all into a single business the overall profit for the shareholders would probably be higher, since the competitors would capture more of the potential market.
- slededit 8y agoWe went through this in the early days of movie theaters. Laws were passed forcing separation as you are mentioning. Its a shame we to revisit this over and over again each time technology changes slightly.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- AdmiralAsshat 8y agoOh right, I knew there was a reason everyone was terrified when HBO let itself be bought by AT&T.
- lotsofpulp 8y agoWhy would anyone be terrified? You can just go to hbo.com and pay $15 for it.
- _grep_ 8y agoThat's probably why AT&T has the upper-hand in this case. People can just stream HBO. This hurts rural customers who don't have reliable internet connections, though.
- what_ever 8y agoPlus streaming gets counted against data quota.
- lozaning 8y agoI worry that some of the news and politics show might have to get their content approved by some kind of corporate board. So far they seem to be pretty hands off, I just hope it stays that way.
- briffle 8y agoHonestly, I kind of hope Dish and Sling hold out. I don't have cable any more, but many of my family members do, and constantly complain about rates going up all the time. If enough cable companies toe the line with HBO, and ESPN, it would put a stop to that..
- Benjammer 8y ago>If enough cable companies toe the line How do you get them to cooperate though? What's to stop AT&T from playing them against each other and just saying the first one to accept their terms gets a sweetheart deal, and everyone else is going to have to pay even more?
- notyourday 8y agoSince now AT&T has the content it makes no sense not to squeeze everyone who needs this content. Turn on your cable or satellite TV and scroll through the channels. Notice everything that is on. Should you do it every day for a month you would realize that it is the same recycled content that is being re-pushed. That's because for all big talk there's just not enough broadcast quality content that is being produced to fill the available slots. Production of the content is not just expensive, it is time consuming.
- Karunamon 8y agoI'd also add that linear content is becoming more and more of an anachronism. As more and more people get access to streaming services, it makes less and less sense to time-box content. Most of Dish's stuff is DVR-based anyways, and everyday channels are telling people to set their DVRs in the promo material. Forcing everything into a time box makes the content problem look worse.
- joezydeco 8y agoDish/Dish Network/Sling/Echostar have been involved in these carriage disputes on and off over the decades. The CEO doesn't willingly give into price hikes and unilateral changes without a fight. He'll just switch the network off (or let it get cut off) and apply the viewer pressure until something is worked out. 2018, Univision: https://www.multichannel.com/news/ergen-univision-blackout-is-probably-permanent https://www.multichannel.com/news/ergen-univision-blackout-i... 2017, CBS: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dish-network-drops-cbs-stations-contract-dispute-1060631 https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dish-network-drops-cb... 2016, Viacom: https://deadline.com/2016/04/viacom-dish-network-resolve-carriage-dispute-1201741471/ https://deadline.com/2016/04/viacom-dish-network-resolve-car... 2012, AMC: https://www.npr.org/2012/09/13/161019358/wheres-my-amc-dish-network-dispute-drags-on https://www.npr.org/2012/09/13/161019358/wheres-my-amc-dish-... 2010, Weather Channel: https://www.reuters.com/article/industry-us-dish-weatherchannel-idUSTRE64J6X320100520 https://www.reuters.com/article/industry-us-dish-weatherchan... 2010, Disney: https://technology.ihs.com/402822/disney-dish-spat-the-battle-over-hd-carriage-premiums-is-underway https://technology.ihs.com/402822/disney-dish-spat-the-battl... Full list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Dish_Network#Programming_disagreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Dish_Network#Prog... Granted, the landscape has changed and it's a lot easier to change streaming providers than the old days when you had to physically switch out your satellite system for DirecTV or go back to CATV/Cable.
- brookshire2 8y agoadblocker + watchepisodeseries.com You're welcome.
- xfitm3 8y agoThis is the kind of behavior that drives cord cutting. Unacceptable IMO.
- mikestew 8y agoThis is the kind of behavior that drives cord cutting And drives them right into the arms of the HBO Now $15/month plan. Oh, yeah, cord-cutters have 'em so torn up at HBO, they're crying rivers of gold bars over there.
- homero 8y agoTheyre already on it https://www.keepmyhbo.com/ https://www.keepmyhbo.com/
- legostormtroopr 8y agoBut GoDaddy and CloudFlare showed it’s ok to kick people of a neutral platform, and tech people will applaud it. If AT&T doesn’t literally point to those two cases to illustrate their right to not host content they don’t agree to, I’d be surprised. This is why cases like Gab recently are important. Common carriers must be impartial, when they aren’t (even with the best intentions) was hey open up the door for bad actors like this case.
- xienze 8y agoWhile this is a practice that is harmful to consumers, it has nothing to do with Net Neutrality. These kind of pissing contests have been going on for decades.
- inscionent 8y agoNot sure why the GP was flagged. Seems unnecessary.
- jonathankoren 8y agoGab.
- jonathankoren 8y agoExactly. Paid television subscriptions (i.e. cable television) is not the Internet, and has always been regulated differently. Even under Net Neutrality, it would get an expedition as bing a specialized service.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoIt has a whole lot to do with net neutrality when an IP-based video streaming service is being blocked by an ISP. This isn't an ordinary cable carriage dispute. If they were blocking YouTube Red, Hulu, and Netflix would you claim that has nothing to do with NN either?
- dragonwriter 8y ago
- reaperducer 8y agoThis kind of dispute between content providers and content distributors happens all the time. Comcast - Disney - AT&T - Nextstar - Sinclair, etc... It's an everlasting dance that's been doing on for decades. The only reason this is interesting to the HN community is because it's happening to Sling. But if Sling wants to play on the level of Scripps, Gannet, etc... it has to play by those rules, and expect these sorts of things to happen. I'm not saying AT&T is right here. But I witnessed at least a dozen of these temporary content blackouts in my previous life in broadcasting. Just because your TV company doesn't have towers doesn't mean you get a free pass.
- ninth_ant 8y agoNo, it doesn’t happen all the time. In fact the article is quite clear that this never happened with HBO before the merger. And also no, Sling being included is not the only reason this is interesting. It’s interesting because it’s a major telco using their newly acquired content as an anticompetitive bludgeon, in direct violation of their quite recent promises to the contrary.
- reaperducer 8y agoNo, it doesn’t happen all the time. Yes, it does. You are correct that this is the first dispute between HBO and Sling. But as I stated, this type of dispute between content creators and content distributors happens all the time. Welcome to professional broadcasting. So much for the SV "disruption" strategy.
- Retric 8y agoIt's more than that it's the first between HBO and anyone. Plus it occurred right after a merger with one of slings competitors.
- jm4 8y agoIt does with Dish/Sling. Fox has been blacked out multiple times on Dish. There is nothing inherently wrong with ATT or the fact that they own HBO that caused this. They want to raise prices and Dish doesn’t want to pay. This is how Dish negotiates and they tell their customers it’s to keep prices low. Channels get blacked out all the time on Dish.
- nradov 8y agoThose are all luxury entertainment products. No one actually needs them, and hopefully a temporary black out will remind viewers that they can live just fine without that video content.
- yeswecould 8y agoExactly! Go outside, take a walk, find a lover.
- bilbo0s 8y agoI bet some people will think this comment is unduly snarky. But if you take the time to step back a moment and think about it, it really is pretty good advice.
- avgDev 8y agoI will probably just find the show I want to watch through usenet or something. Outside is a pretty dangerous place, I prefer digital worlds where I can respawn if I die. /s
- toyg 8y agoOr pirate away. TV is so 1990s.
- sandworm101 8y agoWell, in a past career I worked in film/TV. I needed them. This is an industry like any other. It employs lots of people. Things like blackouts and, in my day, writers strikes impact the livelihoods of a great many. Now facebook, that is pure luxury that we can all do without. And don't get me started on air travel. Get out and walk. Take a train.
- matuszeg 8y agoAs a software engineer who has to have a facebook for API integrations and other bullshit. Facebook is not pure luxury. Wish I could do my job without having to have an account but it is not possible.
- fady 8y agoAT&T continues to act like an old dinosaur with it's crude business tactics, shady telecom deals/mergers and practices. Why hurt customers? This looks bad regardless who's right.
- notyourday 8y agoDish/Sling are not AT&T customers. They are the middleman that prevents AT&T from having a direct access to the customers.
- fomopop 8y agoAT&T heavily subsidizes HBO for TV and telecom subscribers. $5 with DTV Now or free with AT&T Unlimited plan. They are definitely playing long game if they’re willing to lose 2.5 million Dish subscribers. HBO makes about $8 per sub from cable companies, so $20m per month. They are probably trying to push it up to their OTT price ($15). People can still subscribe to HBO Now. Mildly annoying to get it from a separate interface or you have bad internet, but at least there are options.
- cheeze 8y agoIs HBO Now good these days? Last time I used it, it was terrible.
- cstejerean 8y agoWhat's terrible about it? It's the only way I've consumed HBO shows since the day it came out (and the reason why I instantly dropped my cable subscription as soon as standalone HBO became an option with HBO Now).
- dragonwriter 8y ago> Is HBO Now good these days? Last time I used it, it was terrible. If you don't watch live shows anyway, it's (IME) better than HBO-on-Cable, even accompanied by the HBO Go app (which is far more terrible than HBO Now ever was.)
- philg_jr 8y agoRight, no live Real Time :(
- imgabe 8y agoYou can also subscribe through Amazon and watch through whatever Amazon Prime app you use.
- zrail 8y agoThis is what we do. Works great.
- pasbesoin 8y agoPrefix: Speaking generally, with regard to "blackouts" impacting immediate and short-term, essentially already sold and "committed to" services. Pertaining to this instance, that would include taking on and honoring the contracts and commitments already made by your acquisition. -- Here's an idea: Regulation that says the moment they do such, they have to discount all impacted customers' billing by the amount represented by these services. And, up the food chain, the other parties lose their corresponding revenue. No grace period, no exceptions. Every hour of blackout costs them, for what they are not providing on the packages they've sold customers. I'd also argue for an additional penalty assessment for lack of notice to customers of service change. When it starts costing them all money, negotiations may go a bit more smoothly and willingly -- and planfully. "But, contracts!" Commercial contracts face all sorts of legal limitations. This proposal seems a pretty simple and purposeful limitation, that is overdue. -- P.S. Once it's coded into their systems, it can be generalized. Failed Internet connectivity? Discount! Missed service call? Discount! In other words, stop them from externalizing the costs of poor support. (Which they can do all the more readily in the absence of effective competition, a known issue here in the U.S.) P.P.S. You can also see the pressure/incentive this situation provides, for customers to move to online streaming over a neutral carrier (if they can get it), for such programming -- including access at time of release as opposed to through an archive.
- EpicEng 8y agoATT didn't sell it; Dish and sling did, and I'm pretty sure customers aren't going to continue paying for HBO while it's blacked out. I don't understand your approach at all.
- pasbesoin 8y agoMy fault, for reacting more to another headline about "blackouts", than to the specifics. I've tried to clarify, a bit, in my original comment. Customers make commitments, both contractual and personal in terms of time and effort and availability, to media distribution purchases. I think they have a right to receive the product they paid for. If that product fails or changes substantially, they have a right to recompense -- to a corresponding adjustment, at least. They get jerked around by the big media companies: Programming and distribution. Make those companies absorb the costs of their own machinations and failures, instead of passing them on -- financially and otherwise -- to relatively captive customers.
- exabrial 8y agoI cannot wait for cable/sat networks as content providers to come to an end. Everything should be on-demand, leaving the only purpose of cable or sat being live events like sports.
- homero 8y agoThat's what hbo wants see https://www.keepmyhbo.com/ https://www.keepmyhbo.com/
- jerrysievert 8y agoI don't see that happening in the near future, at least not until there is ubiquitous 5g coverage that is affordable. *posting from a place where there's no cell signal and the only internet access available is satellite (the POTS is too noisy for modem connection)
- homero 8y agoWhat the hell, I'm paying extra for hbo on dish and it's blocked? AT&T is disgusting, commercials are coming that's what. They ruined hbo.
- nradov 8y agoSo quit watching HBO. Problem solved.
- OpenBSD-reich 8y agoBitTorrent over Tor (or I2PSnark, which needs more <3) is the superior solution to bad guy big-media. It's free and only needs a minimal amount of patience.
- jedberg 8y ago> The spokerperson said until a resolution is found, customers should look for other ways to access HBO. Do you want piracy? This is how you get piracy.
- WrtCdEvrydy 8y agoI would have dropped the price of HBO Go to half and remove the cable requirement for Sling and AT&T.
- mdasen 8y agoI'm surprised to see AT&T acting so aggressively with its Time Warner purchase so soon. The government argued that the merger would harm consumers and competition. I expected AT&T to wait a year or two before starting to milk extra profits - especially since the DoJ has appealed its loss. After the merger, AT&T removed HBO from its lower-priced wireless plan, raised wireless prices, raised DirecTV NOW prices, and now this. Frankly, I would have expected a year or two of AT&T saying, "see, nothing bad happened! If anything, we're giving consumers more!" Then a couple years later, "because of inflation, costs, whatever, we're raising prices...it wasn't because of the merger at all!" It just seems like AT&T decided to forego plausible deniability. And the merger is being appealed to the DC Circuit court. Literally the DoJ argued that AT&T would have, "both the incentive and the ability to raise its rivals' costs and stifle growth of innovative, next-generation entrants that offer attractive alternatives to AT&T/DirecTV's legacy pay-TV model—all to the detriment of American consumers," and that AT&T would have more power in negotiations with competitors. Now they're proving that. I'm just surprised that AT&T couldn't wait 18 months. 18 months later, the merger wouldn't be on people's minds as much and they could argue that the market had shifted (production costs, more competition from YouTube, whatever). Doing these things so soon makes a really clear cause and effect. Waiting gives you deniability.
- acct1771 8y agoThey know we won't stop paying them/accost them appropriately.
- JustSomeNobody 8y agoThey don't care. What's anyone going to do? Nothing. Nobody is going to do a thing about it.
- j4kp07 8y agoSpeak for yourself. I vote with my wallet and cut the cord well over 5 years ago.
- lowtolerance 8y ago
- bobinmoscow 8y agoIt is time to break up AT&T. Their abuse of HBO customers on Dish network is an outrage. Senators and Cobgressman from rural districts need to band together, regardless of party and work together to break up AT&T. I know that as of today I will never consider switching to DirectTV and I’m going to take a long look at switching phone and internet carriers. Hey Hey Ho Ho AT&T must go! Seriously though, the fact that AT&T can get away with this is just another sign that our government is in steep decline!
- anonytrary 8y ago> AT&T acquired HBO when it bought Time Warner for USD 85.4 million Holy crap, I didn't know this. That seems like absolute peanuts. Edit: As pointed out, the article dropped a factor of 1000. Mildly infuriating, to the say the least. I guess they pointed it out at the end of the article, shame on me then.
- howlingfantods 8y agoThat should be 85.4 billion. Seems like a misprint.
- anonytrary 8y agohttps://money.cnn.com/2018/06/12/media/att-time-warner-ruling/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/12/media/att-time-warner-rulin... Yep, just looked it up to verify, I thought it was fishy as hell. Shame on the original article, that's such a silly misprint.
- anonytrary 8y ago> We hope you've enjoyed your free articles. I don't think I've ever been to this site in my life, but they claim I've used up my free articles. Clearing cookies solves this.