G
GusX
Guest
Do you have a link on the ruling? I'm interested in reading it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
S
smooth28la
Guest
You can't make billing-related changes on the my-account website. You can only 'enhance' programming but not downgrade.
G
GusX
Guest
For those interested in the Supreme Court decision of April 26th, 2002 ... here is the link.
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2002/2002scc42/2002scc42.html
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2002/2002scc42/2002scc42.html
S
spoonky
Guest
just to let u guys know that there is no law in the usa about subscribing to foriegn tv services.its only a canadian law.so he is not breaking any of the usa laws.its up to each of the indivual companies to deside if they want to let them subcribe to there service in the usa
A
ARR
Guest
That's probably why *c accomodates their U.S. subscribers significantly better.
I've been there when a rep took a call for a U.S. sub and they managed to work everything out.
They can even provide aiming data for major U.S. locations.
Maybe Bell's relationship with Echostar is a barrier to doing the same.
Of course it didn't help that many snowbirds were locked out of the signal footprint due to Nimiq technical issues while the new Anik birds actually enhanced southern coverage.
I've been there when a rep took a call for a U.S. sub and they managed to work everything out.
They can even provide aiming data for major U.S. locations.
Maybe Bell's relationship with Echostar is a barrier to doing the same.
Of course it didn't help that many snowbirds were locked out of the signal footprint due to Nimiq technical issues while the new Anik birds actually enhanced southern coverage.
No that would be the VICE PRESIDENT dick cheney... lmao
I'm not an American attorney so I cannot make a professional opinion on US laws. But I've seen reputable big-box retailers in the US selling StarChoice equipment in the US. And we've also heard people claim that StarChoice has knowingly and willingly provided its services to residents of the United States. Go figure.
Yes, but why no Directv Canada to service Canadians? You think it's because Dave decided against it? Even tho in the past he's knowingly serviced hundreds of thousands of Canadian subscribers both directly and via greymarket dealers. If it were possible, most likely Directv would have created a legal subsidiary in Canada and satisfied a market need here, just like so many other American corporations have done. Instead we have BEV rogers & shaw, and few here are satisfied LOL
I'm not an American attorney so I cannot make a professional opinion on US laws. But I've seen reputable big-box retailers in the US selling StarChoice equipment in the US. And we've also heard people claim that StarChoice has knowingly and willingly provided its services to residents of the United States. Go figure.
Yes, but why no Directv Canada to service Canadians? You think it's because Dave decided against it? Even tho in the past he's knowingly serviced hundreds of thousands of Canadian subscribers both directly and via greymarket dealers. If it were possible, most likely Directv would have created a legal subsidiary in Canada and satisfied a market need here, just like so many other American corporations have done. Instead we have BEV rogers & shaw, and few here are satisfied LOL
C
Cambridge
Guest
It is NOT illegal to use an ExpressVu receiver in the USA....
It is contrary to the ExpressVU residential subscription agreement. This is a matter of policy and ExpressVu's copyright agreements with channel providers.
The CRTC has no authority on this issue. The CRTC governs Canadian broadcasters only....therefore there is no CRTC policy on this.
As far as I am aware there is no US law preventing anyone from using an ExpressVu receiver in the USA.
In Canada the Supreme Court never ruled on the Constitutional issue of receiving foreign DTH signals here with a subscription....it is ILLEGAL to pirate the foreign signal.
It is contrary to the ExpressVU residential subscription agreement. This is a matter of policy and ExpressVu's copyright agreements with channel providers.
The CRTC has no authority on this issue. The CRTC governs Canadian broadcasters only....therefore there is no CRTC policy on this.
As far as I am aware there is no US law preventing anyone from using an ExpressVu receiver in the USA.
In Canada the Supreme Court never ruled on the Constitutional issue of receiving foreign DTH signals here with a subscription....it is ILLEGAL to pirate the foreign signal.
S
SensualPoet
Guest
Don't you have a trusted parent, borther, sister, best friend, you can ask to make this call from Canada for you?
Presumably you do live in Canada an only watch ExpressVu while on Canadian soil ....
Presumably you do live in Canada an only watch ExpressVu while on Canadian soil ....
A
ARR
Guest
It's my belief that some court ruled it was illegal to decrypt encrypted satellite signals to ANY provider where payment is not made AND in all cases where the provider has no autjorization in Canada or something to that effect.
What you have suggested was true some time ago when the ruling was that since you couldn't legally subscribe to a foreign provider, that decrypting that siganl was not illegal since 'stealing' something for which you cannot legally pay for was quitye acceptable.
That doesn't mean you should go out and steal your friends stash of dope.
This was primarly pushed by Bell in attempts to gain subs by removing competition.
You wouldn't happen to be a friend of Bev Fan per chance?
What you have suggested was true some time ago when the ruling was that since you couldn't legally subscribe to a foreign provider, that decrypting that siganl was not illegal since 'stealing' something for which you cannot legally pay for was quitye acceptable.
That doesn't mean you should go out and steal your friends stash of dope.
This was primarly pushed by Bell in attempts to gain subs by removing competition.
You wouldn't happen to be a friend of Bev Fan per chance?
J
jgvp
Guest
I don't know why the governing bodies in both the United States and Canada regard satellite TV as being so sacrosanct that each legislates against its satellite signals being received in the other country. Short wave radio has been beamed around the entire planet since the early 1920s and OTA TV has been around since the early 50s without any ruling bodies taking steps to prevent the reception of those signals, so what really are the objections based upon when it comes to satellite TV ?
Actually, the latter have made provisions for residents of other countries to view their signal, where local law permits (thus Canadian law revokes from residents of Canuckistan their freedom of choice to watch what they want)
And US law does not prohibit Expressvu from selling its service in the US market; rather that is ExpressVu's choice. The other canadian DTH provider has chosen to sell it service to residents of the U.S.
And US law does not prohibit Expressvu from selling its service in the US market; rather that is ExpressVu's choice. The other canadian DTH provider has chosen to sell it service to residents of the U.S.
J
james99
Guest
Nope. Expressvu can not sell it's signals to the US market.
Do you honestly think that Expressvu woudn't sell it's signal, if it could?
Expressvu would have to be regulated by the FCC and if that ever happend Dishnetwork and Directv would demand access to the Canadian market.
Do you honestly think that Expressvu woudn't sell it's signal, if it could?
Expressvu would have to be regulated by the FCC and if that ever happend Dishnetwork and Directv would demand access to the Canadian market.
G
GusX
Guest
I know that ... thats why I marked it as "Supreme Court decision of April 26th, 2002" .
Im still waiting for SensualPoet to post proof that the radio communication act doesnt impede on the charter that went through lower courts. Its not that I dont believe him ... I just dont remember such a decision.
Im still waiting for SensualPoet to post proof that the radio communication act doesnt impede on the charter that went through lower courts. Its not that I dont believe him ... I just dont remember such a decision.
E
Ex Agent EV
Guest
Impossible to reach throught the 1-888, which will only work in Canada. Bell Express Vu doesn't have broadcasting rights in the USA, your utilisation there is therefore considered illegal. Could be one of the reason why your service does not work anymore... You can make the change on the bell.ca web site or by having a relative in Canada call and give us the info. That person will need the PIN
A
ARR
Guest
It's because Rupert is pissed at those enterprising Canadians like Pierre G. Martineau and his marvelous SLE program.
And wasn't the original battery board created in Edmonton?
And wasn't the original battery board created in Edmonton?
Then why does *C knowingingly service people who are resident in the US? Which US law permits *C to do so and not BEV? Are you sure it isn't a business agreement between Bev and Chuck that restricts Bev?
Another thing for sure, Directv provides it service to millions in latin america.
Another thing for sure, Directv provides it service to millions in latin america.
G
GusX
Guest
Thats correct. According to the decision, you are only allowed to decrpyt signals from a "lawful distributor" under the Radio Communication Act.
S
smooth28la
Guest
I went to the online system and saw the make the payment using credit card, HOWEVER, IT SAYS "Please call 1-888-SKYDISH to proceed to a credit card payment."
No Go!
No Go!