Has reporting CableCARD/SDV issues to the FCC gotten easier?

[bdraw]

When the FCC declined to require an IP back channel, as apposed to Tuning Adapters to make CableCARD devices work with SDV, it was because it mandated that Tuning Adapters must actually work. In that same order the FCC indicated that it would make it easier for people to file complaints when things didn't work, and that if enough complaints were filed, the FCC would review the decision.

Since the mandate was released in October of 2010, has the complaint process gotten any easier?

I tried it myself just now and although the complaint site asked me questions about CableCARD etc, I was directed to the General Media complaint form. The fields on that form don't seem very well suited for CableCARD or Tuning Adapter complaints though.

[dlfl]

And of more fundamental importance:
How effective are your complaints likely to be? After all -- a government bureaucracy lead by six political appointees, and woefully under-resourced to implement the grandiose vision of micro-managing that some seem to desire from it. (I think we're lucky they aren't up to that amount of control.)

[bdraw]

Originally Posted by dlfl

How effective are your complaints likely to be?

Hard to know really, but one thing is for sure, if you don't complain, they defiantly won't do anything.

[nrc]

It's easy to complain. Just fill out the form at this link.

https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/f...orm_type=2000E

Whether complaints are effective is another question.

[mattack]

Originally Posted by bdraw

they defiantly won't do anything.

Very humorous typo (I sure hope it's a typo).

[slowbiscuit]

I don't know what really happens after the complaint is forwarded to the MSO, because I'm at that point now. My complaint about Comcast's CC outlet charges got forwarded to the same exec relations lady that I talked to in the first place before I filed the complaint.

So, after Comcast lies to the FCC in response to the forwarded complaint (i.e., the customer does not agree with the response that outlet fees are correct, but they blow it off to the FCC), what happens? There is no escalation or review mechanism that I can see on the FCC's website.

[dlfl]

Originally Posted by bdraw

Hard to know really, but one thing is for sure, if you don't complain, they defiantly won't do anything.

And maybe them doing nothing might be better overall. If they hadn't forced the CableCARD/Tuning-adapter fiasco on the operators, maybe the free market would have come up with something better by now. I question the general assumption that having a government agency control things is the only way to address issues.

[rainwater]

Originally Posted by dlfl

And maybe them doing nothing might be better overall. If they hadn't forced the CableCARD/Tuning-adapter fiasco on the operators, maybe the free market would have come up with something better by now.

The free market of cable MSOs? That is what you call an oxymoron. It wouldn't matter what the free market would of come up with since the cable companies control the devices on their system.

[slowbiscuit]

There is no free market for cable TV, so government oversight is required.

[dlfl]

Originally Posted by rainwater

The free market of cable MSOs? That is what you call an oxymoron. It wouldn't matter what the free market would of come up with since the cable companies control the devices on their system.

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

There is no free market for cable TV, so government oversight is required.

But you're missing the big picture. TV delivery isn't limited to Cable TV. If the CableCARD/TA kluge wasn't there to patch up the usability of Cable TV for TiVo users, they would have been looking elsewhere years ago and that increased demand for alternate delivery mechanisms might have had a desirable market effect. The more cord-cutters there are, the faster the other delivery systems will roll out.

[slowbiscuit]

Where's this big picture if all you can get is cable, from one company? This is not an unusual occurrence.

The point isn't that there aren't alternatives, I accept that - the point is that if all you can get is cable, you have at most a couple of choices so it is essentially a monopoly/duopoly market, just like it is with wired HSI today.

[unitron]

Originally Posted by dlfl

And maybe them doing nothing might be better overall. If they hadn't forced the CableCARD/Tuning-adapter fiasco on the operators, maybe the free market would have come up with something better by now. I question the general assumption that having a government agency control things is the only way to address issues.

But in almost everywhere cable companies don't compete with each other and have no incentive to make it easier to use stuff like TiVos that they don't collect extra rent on each month. In fact, the incentive is to make it harder, if not impossible, which is why consumers need the government to slap them around 'til they do what we want.

[dlfl]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

Where's this big picture if all you can get is cable, from one company? This is not an unusual occurrence.

The point isn't that there aren't alternatives, I accept that - the point is that if all you can get is cable, you have at most a couple of choices so it is essentially a monopoly/duopoly market, just like it is with wired HSI today.

Aren't you neglecting Satellite TV, with three choices? Also, if you have "a couple of choices" you have competition, unless they are colluding (which is illegal and can and should be punished by law). Enforcing laws is what we need government to do, not forcing businesses to do things the way we prefer just because we "need" it. (LIke a child "needs" candy.)

What percentage of our population doesn't have at least two choices of cable and/or satellite service?

One concern I have about iinternet TV, which I hope will dominate in the future, is that there is much less competition for delivery of HSI than there is for TV. For electricity and natural gas distribution we have a system where there is only one conduit into yor home but gas or electric suppliers can compete on price of what you use. Same kind of thing for POTS. Hopefully, an analogous architecture can be developed with fiber optic conduits so that either "cable" TV or HSI providers can compete without having to run separate conduits to your house. I don't believe cable runs can provide the bandwidth necessary for this approach.

[slowbiscuit]

Originally Posted by dlfl

Aren't you neglecting Satellite TV, with three choices?

No, of course not - I said 'if all you can get is cable', i.e. sat is blocked by trees or you're in an apartment, condo etc. without a way to get it.

As you mentioned, we're even worse off for internet TV because of the limited choices for HSI. The incumbents are doing everything they can with usage caps, high prices, etc. to keep the money stream going even if folks try to cut the cord. IMO we need regulation of the broadband market WAY more than TV, because it's much more important and much less competitive. But our Congress has been bought off, so the existing monopoly/duopolys for wired HSI will be able to do whatever they want.

[geekmedic]

You guys are going about this the wrong way. Call your Congressman or Senator. Have them fight on your behalf. The FCC pays attention to their staff members emails moreso than our complaints.