The End of Free OTA

wrote:
In alt.tv.tech.hdtv RobertVA wrote:
| wrote:
|
| And not everyone is eligible, even if they need one. For example they have
| decided that even if one TV in the house has cable or satellite, or can
| receive digital, all others are ineligible. And they won't allow combining
| two coupons for one box even if the box costs more than the value of two
| coupons combined. My guess is they think there will be more demand for
| them than there will be coupons available. That remains to be seen come
| the day they start issuing them.
|
| Incorrect.
|
| Only after the funding from the initial appropriation runs out will the
| limitation to non-cable/satellite/fiber households kick in. The second
| block of funding will have the stricter eligibility requirement.

That's not what the notice said. Do you have a source for this?


Once again poor old phil shows his hypocrisy. He demands citations, but
*never* supplies them to support his own claims? In this case, all he
had to do was post a link to the "notice" to which he refers. I think
that he is too ignorant to do so. He is an ignorant, self centered,
hypocritical blow hard, after all.

Matthew
--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| wrote:
| In alt.tv.tech.hdtv RobertVA wrote:
| | wrote:
| |
| | And not everyone is eligible, even if they need one. For example they have
| | decided that even if one TV in the house has cable or satellite, or can
| | receive digital, all others are ineligible. And they won't allow combining
| | two coupons for one box even if the box costs more than the value of two
| | coupons combined. My guess is they think there will be more demand for
| | them than there will be coupons available. That remains to be seen come
| | the day they start issuing them.
| |
| | Incorrect.
| |
| | Only after the funding from the initial appropriation runs out will the
| | limitation to non-cable/satellite/fiber households kick in. The second
| | block of funding will have the stricter eligibility requirement.
|
| That's not what the notice said. Do you have a source for this?
|
|
| Once again poor old phil shows his hypocrisy. He demands citations, but
| *never* supplies them to support his own claims? In this case, all he
| had to do was post a link to the "notice" to which he refers. I think
| that he is too ignorant to do so. He is an ignorant, self centered,
| hypocritical blow hard, after all.

The link/URL was already posted (message ID "[email protected]")
5 levels up from here, 4 levels up from your post, and 3 levels up from my
reference to the notice.

I bet if I had posted it, you'd use duplication as a justification for your
persistent agenda of contributing nothing to this group and just making
personal attacks on people rather than pointedly refuting what you happen
to think might possibly be in error with their statements.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

"Alan" wrote

So you're saying we should steal service.

It isn't stealing till they find out about it. If you don't order any
Pay-For-View, you'll be fine.

Is it stealing to shoplift if you don't get caught?

Store mechandise is to electrons as...

Someone finding out about it has nothing to do with whether or not it is stealing.

Sure it does. If they don't tell me I can't have it...

The terms of your contract with the cable company has everything to do with it.

What if I have no contract?

--oTTo--

In article , Otto Bahn wrote:
"Alan" wrote

So you're saying we should steal service.

It isn't stealing till they find out about it. If you don't order any
Pay-For-View, you'll be fine.

Is it stealing to shoplift if you don't get caught?

Store mechandise is to electrons as...

From Last Comic Standing a few weeks ago, apparently there are these PSA's
in Australia saying "you wouldn't steal your friend's car, would you?"
And his response was no, but if his friend said "I just got this great
new car, would you like me to burn you a copy," that would be different.

In a hundred years, that will stop being a joke. When people can print
their own cars, suddenly the car companies will have to put a lot more
effort into defending their intellectual property.

--
Nick Bensema AIM: NBensema
==== ======= ============== http://www.io.com/~nickb/

"Nick Bensema" wrote

So you're saying we should steal service.

It isn't stealing till they find out about it. If you don't order any
Pay-For-View, you'll be fine.

Is it stealing to shoplift if you don't get caught?

Store mechandise is to electrons as...

From Last Comic Standing a few weeks ago, apparently there are these PSA's
in Australia saying "you wouldn't steal your friend's car, would you?"
And his response was no, but if his friend said "I just got this great
new car, would you like me to burn you a copy," that would be different.

In a hundred years, that will stop being a joke. When people can print
their own cars, suddenly the car companies will have to put a lot more
effort into defending their intellectual property.

The people making big bucks will be those making machines
that can print cars. My heart bleeds for the buggy whip
manufacturers too.

Right now it isn't illegal for me to machine tool every
part of a Ferrari and put it together. I just can't call
it a genuine Ferrari.

--oTTo--

Post the damned link!

===============
wrote in message
...
In alt.tv.tech.hdtv Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| wrote:
| In alt.tv.tech.hdtv RobertVA wrote:
| | wrote:
| |
| | And not everyone is eligible, even if they need one. For example
they have
| | decided that even if one TV in the house has cable or satellite, or
can
| | receive digital, all others are ineligible. And they won't allow
combining
| | two coupons for one box even if the box costs more than the value of
two
| | coupons combined. My guess is they think there will be more demand
for
| | them than there will be coupons available. That remains to be seen
come
| | the day they start issuing them.
| |
| | Incorrect.
| |
| | Only after the funding from the initial appropriation runs out will
the
| | limitation to non-cable/satellite/fiber households kick in. The
second
| | block of funding will have the stricter eligibility requirement.
|
| That's not what the notice said. Do you have a source for this?
|
|
| Once again poor old phil shows his hypocrisy. He demands citations, but
| *never* supplies them to support his own claims? In this case, all he
| had to do was post a link to the "notice" to which he refers. I think
| that he is too ignorant to do so. He is an ignorant, self centered,
| hypocritical blow hard, after all.

The link/URL was already posted (message ID
"[email protected]")
5 levels up from here, 4 levels up from your post, and 3 levels up from my
reference to the notice.

I bet if I had posted it, you'd use duplication as a justification for
your
persistent agenda of contributing nothing to this group and just making
personal attacks on people rather than pointedly refuting what you happen
to think might possibly be in error with their statements.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below
|
| first name lower case at ipal.net /
|
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

Otto Bahn wrote:
Right now it isn't illegal for me to machine tool every
part of a Ferrari and put it together.

Have you checked that assertion with your patent lawyer?

¬R

In article ,
Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:

Have you checked that reflection in your patent leather?

¬R

IFYPFY.

--
- Doctroid Doctroid Holmes
It's too confused to make sense, so let's make nonsense.
-- Chris McG.

"Glenn Knickerbocker" wrote

Right now it isn't illegal for me to machine tool every
part of a Ferrari and put it together.

Have you checked that assertion with your patent lawyer?

Yeah, there's no legal issue till Ferrari finds out and complains,
if they complain.

--oTTo--

"Otto Bahn" wrote in message
...
"Glenn Knickerbocker" wrote

Right now it isn't illegal for me to machine tool every
part of a Ferrari and put it together.

Have you checked that assertion with your patent lawyer?

Yeah, there's no legal issue till Ferrari finds out and complains,
if they complain.

--oTTo--

Actually Ferrari DID complain when the hero dudes of Miami Vice went
cruising around in a phony 365GTB Daytona. Ferrari sued, but then offered
them a Testarossa, figuring the advertising was worth more than the lawsuit

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison