# E* just told me to hook up phone lines to my receivers, or else...



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

E* just sent me a letter telling me that I must hook up all of my receivers to phone lines or face cancellation of service. This despite the fact that when I signed for E*, I specifically asked about phone lines and was assured I would not need to hook any up to my receivers. 

I now have 5 receivers in total. Two are in one room (a 6000 for viewing and a 5000 for recording). Now, I can get them hooked up with a little work, but the others, ain't gonna happen. I live in an old house and only have two jacks (one put in recently by the phone company). Adding more would be difficult and expensive, since I would need the phone company to come in.

So am I to spend about $200+ on a wireless setup for the other three receivers? That is totally unacceptable. Not to mention I have DSL and reading the fine print on the Wireless jacks says they don't work with DSL.

Has anyone else faced this with E*? E* sent me a residential customer agreement claiming all receivers must be connected by phone, but I went through all my paperwork and could not find a bloody thing like it. And again, they told me I would not need a phone line hooked up to any receiver.

Not happy


----------



## Darkman (Apr 16, 2002)

hmm.. interesting..
Email them back - and tell them your story..


----------



## greylar (Oct 31, 2002)

That is strange. Although I have heard that if you have multiple receivers Dish wants to verify that they are all in the same house.

G


----------



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

Problem may be solved. I am talking with a high level guy I know at E*.


----------



## cycy2 (Sep 16, 2003)

what is your potential resolution?


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

I'm interested in the resolution also.
Hypothetical: I don't recall anywhere that required me to have it hooked up to a phone line. The phrasing I remember is something like 'For optimum usefulness, leave the unit connected to a land phone line at all times.'
So--if they cancel you for not having it hooked to a phone line, even though that's not spelled out in the contract; and you have a contract remaining--since they are breaking the contract, does that get you out of your remaining contractual obligation? If so, I hope this happens to me--my contract runs till January, and I can't even get dish where I am now, so all my units are stacked in a closet somewhere, costing me 35 bucks a month.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I always thought that both E* and D* required that if you have multiple receivers you had to hook them up to a phone line so they could verify that they are all in the same location.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Here's your link on the E* Residential Service Agreement -- The particular paragraph in question is 1F.

http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/aboutus/RCA/index.shtml


----------



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

E* is working on a Wireless Phone jack system for customers like me, who would have to spend mucho bucks to install new phone jacks (or buying wireless ones, which are expensive).

They will give me the wireless jacks needed once they verify my receivers are in fact at my home. I call them, they send info to my receiver, I read it off to them and that way they know my receivers are actually at my home. Then they send the wireless jacks out, only charging me for shipping.


----------



## Ace (Dec 4, 2002)

Do all receivers have to be connected to the same phone number\line? I have 2 different phone numbers at my house(1 main number and another one for my computer DSL). What if 2 receivers were hooked to 1 phone number and the other 2 receivers to a different phone number? Could all 4 receivers be on the same account?


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

I have 4 E* receivers.

Have never, ever had a single one connected to a phone line.

Have never, ever had them tell me to do so or threaten to pull my plug either.


----------



## cicijay (Jan 6, 2003)

Ace said:


> Do all receivers have to be connected to the same phone number\line? I have 2 different phone numbers at my house(1 main number and another one for my computer DSL). What if 2 receivers were hooked to 1 phone number and the other 2 receivers to a different phone number? Could all 4 receivers be on the same account?


Why are you paying for a second phone line for your DSL? I have my DSL on the same phone line as my main number.


----------



## Ace (Dec 4, 2002)

cicijay said:


> Why are you paying for a second phone line for your DSL? I have my DSL on the same phone line as my main number.


One number for the wife and I, and a different number for the kids.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

ibglowin said:


> I have 4 E* receivers.
> 
> Have never, ever had a single one connected to a phone line.
> 
> Have never, ever had them tell me to do so or threaten to pull my plug either.


 I've been with Dish since 97 and had 4 extra receivers for quite sometime now and I got my letter Saturday saying the same thing. I have cut out two of my receivers off my account. I also started a second subscription for my second home in Arkansas for the 301 with just top 50 and locals. Dish is sending me a wireless jack for free and no shipping cost. This will put me in full compliance with their rules.

Of course I had to cut my programming subscription in order to keep my bill down for two subscriptions. When the 522 comes out for current customers I will replace my son's 508 dvr with it and have two different lines running to two different tvs. I might replace the 721 with a 522 also and I would be able to do 4 tvs with just the fee of one extra receiver. This will be like having the extra receivers with out all the additional receiver fees.

Seems like a lot of trouble to be in full compliance with their rules and I will end up buying a lot less in programming and additional receiver fees, but if that's what they want . They really need to find a way around the phone connections, especially for people with out a land based phone. A lot of people I know don't even have one they use cell phones for everything. Maybe in the future they will embed a tracking device in the box and they will be able to see if your receivers are all in the same house. Of course then they would have to have a division of security officers who do nothing buy show up at people's house and ask to see how many receivers you have and can they see them. This sounds more like the federal government. This will ultimately backfire on Dish in lost revenue from additional fees etc.

Maybe that is the future idea of Dish: make receivers that serve as an entire server for up to 4 tvs all in one box, like the mythical 544. This way get as many 4 tvs hooked up to one receiver and no additional fees . Then customers would be happy and Dish would get what they want ; no customers could stack their accounts .


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2003)

So you claim to have a friend high up the food chain at Echo? That begs the question, why then, would you come here first to solve your alleged problem?

This is such a fun place to find something to giggle about!!

-Earl
Yankee born-Southern bred


----------



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

Earl, I simply could not get ahold of him. So I figured why not post here, since you guys pretty much know everything anyway? As luck would have it, he got back to just moments after I posted. So good fortune for me.

Basically, E* is working on their own Wireless jack system for folks with multiple receivers, but few jacks. Older homes are the problem. Most (like mine) have one,m maybe two jacks and it is cost prohibitive to have the phone company come in. Buying wireless jacks for 4 or 5 receivers is even more expensive.

So, longer term customers will be able to get a deal on the jacks. The plan is still being worked on now, so I am one of the first to come aboard. I likely won't get the jacks for sometime.

In order to keep the FCC off their back and combat rampant piracy, they figured giving away the phone jack setups would be less expensive than doing nothing. It makes sense. At least they are being reasonable with us. My home is old and had ONE jack in the kitchen when I moved in. I was going to have four more added throughout the house but when the SNET got here, he flipped. The phone box was in bad shape and the work required would have cost me hundreds of dollars. I settled on one jack on the opposite end of the house. So this DISH offer works fine for me.


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

Matt Stevens said:


> In order to keep the FCC off their back and combat rampant piracy, they figured giving away the phone jack setups would be less expensive than doing nothing. It makes sense. At least they are being reasonable with us.


I'll admit I am somewhat ignorant of the technical details, but how does the phone connection either help the FCC or prevent piracy? I can see how it might prevent sharing an account, which is one thing, but does the FCC require some sort of 'call-in' from the receivers?


----------



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

It's the piracy angle.


----------



## gjrhine (May 16, 2002)

What happens if you've gone all cell with no land lines?


----------



## rtt2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Look at this way; a lot of people will be getting free wireless jacks soon. It really doesn't bother honest people and will enable a lot of people to get caller-id on their TVs now.
Personally I am thinking of disconnecting my receivers from their phone jacks so I can get the free wireless jacks. I can add phones to places in my house that are much more convenient.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Cells have no dial tone. They won't be recognized even if you put the signal through your land line set up.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

Ace said:


> One number for the wife and I, and a different number for the kids.


I hope you mean one Voice line for you and your wife and a different number for the kids.

DSL hookups for multiple computers do not require multiple lines.


----------



## sethb (Oct 14, 2003)

Boy, I have 4 receivers now too, and if Dish tells me I need a landline, they're going to lose a customer. Even though I'm on the DHP, and still under contract, it'd be cheaper to buy my way out of the DHP than to pay for an unnecessary land line just because Dish can't adapt to the modern age. If the receivers supported broadband connections I'd be fine, as that's how my two TiVo boxes connect.

I also was VERY clear with Dish when I signed up for the DHP that I had no land line, and was told that didn't matter. If they come back now and tell me one is required, I'm prepared to fight it.



Geronimo said:


> Cells have no dial tone. They won't be recognized even if you put the signal through your land line set up.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

First they will go after those with the most receivers then they might end up working their way down until they have almost everyone hooked up to a phone that they can.


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2003)

The answer to this new 'rule' is very obvious. Your receiver is not only forwarding pay - per- view info. when it dials overnight. It also is sending info. on how you used the receiver during the day; what channels you watched, and for how long. Since the cable industry is basically forcing DBS operators to hand over this data, so they can better their own programming and gain ground in the fight for supremacy, without a phone line hookup no info. about your viewing habits goes out ever. Imagine if NOBODY hooked up phone lines to receivers. Dish wouldn't have cared, but surely the FCC and cable industry would have notified DBS operators right away. Also, now that many local channels are provided in many cities, you can bet Neilsen Media had a say, also.


----------



## Ace (Dec 4, 2002)

tnsprin said:


> I hope you mean one Voice line for you and your wife and a different number for the kids.
> 
> DSL hookups for multiple computers do not require multiple lines.


Yes, they are voice lines.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

crest said:


> The answer to this new 'rule' is very obvious. Your receiver is not only forwarding pay - per- view info. when it dials overnight. It also is sending info. on how you used the receiver during the day; what channels you watched, and for how long. Since the cable industry is basically forcing DBS operators to hand over this data, so they can better their own programming and gain ground in the fight for supremacy, without a phone line hookup no info. about your viewing habits goes out ever. Imagine if NOBODY hooked up phone lines to receivers. Dish wouldn't have cared, but surely the FCC and cable industry would have notified DBS operators right away. Also, now that many local channels are provided in many cities, you can bet Neilsen Media had a say, also.


Proof?????


----------



## btbrossard (Oct 4, 2002)

crest said:


> The answer to this new 'rule' is very obvious. Your receiver is not only forwarding pay - per- view info. when it dials overnight. It also is sending info. on how you used the receiver during the day; what channels you watched, and for how long. Since the cable industry is basically forcing DBS operators to hand over this data, so they can better their own programming and gain ground in the fight for supremacy, without a phone line hookup no info. about your viewing habits goes out ever. Imagine if NOBODY hooked up phone lines to receivers. Dish wouldn't have cared, but surely the FCC and cable industry would have notified DBS operators right away. Also, now that many local channels are provided in many cities, you can bet Neilsen Media had a say, also.


Not that I would care if Dish knew what I was watching, but it does sound a little strange to me.

Should I feel like someone is watching me the next time I watch Jerry Springer?

I would imagine the root cause of Dish enforcing the phone line requirement is to prevent account stacking. If they wanted to know your viewing habits, they would have sent the letters out to all customers, in my opinion.

/Benjamin


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2003)

Satellite tv is "direct - to -home", meaning it only sends information one way; from the satellite to the receiver. Cable tv is 'full duplex', sending info. to and fro. (to customer and back to headends). Ever wonder how Neilsen compiles just how many people watched the big game? In today's day and age, it's done electronically at cable headends (using specialized equipment), whereas by satellite it's done by phone line.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

crest said:


> Ever wonder how Neilsen compiles just how many people watched the big game? In today's day and age, it's done electronically at cable headends (using specialized equipment), whereas by satellite it's done by phone line.


Not quite right. When people watch the analog cable channels on a "cable ready" TV there is no way that Neilsen and the cable companies can collect information on what you are viewing. Having been "a Neilsen family" three times in the last ten years here is what they do: If you get all your channels without a cable box they send you a log book to fill out. If you have a cable box, they replace it with a "special box" that keeps track of what you watch. The box "senses" when someone is in the room so you can't just leave the box on your favorite channel so that it gets high ratings. If you have satellite you are given a book to fill out. Neilsen collects a lot of information about its "family". They want ages, occupations, income level and a lot of other information. During the "survey period" they send you constant reminders about making sure that every member of the family fill out the book. At the end of the survey period they send you a little "incentive" (last time it was $5) to send in your book.

Quite frankly, I think the viewing information that they collect is almost worthless. First, their sample size is WAY too small. Second, they use the same people over and over again. I know three other families that have been selected more than twice in the last five years. Third, people either change their viewing habits or lie about them during the survey period.

I think the method that the DVRs use (such as TiVo) provide much more reliable information.


----------



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

> Look at this way; a lot of people will be getting free wireless jacks soon. It really doesn't bother honest people and will enable a lot of people to get caller-id on their TVs now.
> Personally I am thinking of disconnecting my receivers from their phone jacks so I can get the free wireless jacks. I can add phones to places in my house that are much more convenient.


 That won't work. The offer will only be for people who have had no phone line connected at all. I'm sure a few people will sneak in, but that's to be expected.


----------



## Tom_P (May 8, 2002)

Well I have 4 receivers on my account and I just signed a new 1 year contract when I bought my 6000 for $199. I have a receiver on the living room , bedroom. son room, and my daughter's. My monthly payment is well over $90 when I added the $10 for HDTV.
I just have a Cellphone, actually 3 of them, wife, older son and mine. I won't install a land line in my home, gave that up when I switched from Verizon to Sprint because they offer me wireless web. Is cheaper for me this way. If a land line is required I'm screwed....


----------



## Neutron (Oct 2, 2003)

Tom_P said:


> Well I have 4 receivers on my account and I just signed a new 1 year contract when I bought my 6000 for $199. I have a receiver on the living room , bedroom. son room, and my daughter's. My monthly payment is well over $90 when I added the $10 for HDTV.
> I just have a Cellphone, actually 3 of them, wife, older son and mine. I won't install a land line in my home, gave that up when I switched from Verizon to Sprint because they offer me wireless web. Is cheaper for me this way. If a land line is required I'm screwed....


I have yet to get a letter and I have 3 receivers, including the 510 I got with the offer installed on Saturday. The installer didn't say a word about the phone line being hooked up. In fact, when we first got DISH (8-2002) the original installer told us to not hook up the phone cables because it wasn't needed unless we were ordering PPV (which we do occasionally). My 3rd receiver is in a room with no phone jack and the bedroom has the phone jack on the other side of the room. I really don't want to run a long phone cord underneath my carpet. I don't think DISH will enforce this too much.


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

dtcarson said:


> I'll admit I am somewhat ignorant of the technical details, but how does the phone connection either help the FCC or prevent piracy? I can see how it might prevent sharing an account, which is one thing, but does the FCC require some sort of 'call-in' from the receivers?


Heres the problem. Lets say your neighbor wants dish. He buys the equipment somewhere and sets it all up (including the dish). You then bring the receiver over to your house (your a paying customer already), you swap out the receiver for a few minutes and make the call to Dish and activate the receiver (with all of your programming now for only $4.99/mo). Your neighbor then takes the receiver back to his house, reconnects it all and VIOLA, he gets all the same channels you receive. You now have to of course work out a deal as to how much he pays you each month. But if you could cut your Dish bill in half doing this.......

Forcing the phone connection means every night when ET (your receiver's phone home) Dish can see the phone number on the caller ID and they can then verify that this number is connected to your account.

Its a smart move to cut down on piracy. It could backfire if enough people say forget it and switch back to the dark side (cable)


----------



## Neutron (Oct 2, 2003)

ibglowin said:


> Heres the problem. Lets say your neighbor wants dish. He buys the equipment somewhere and sets it all up (including the dish). You then bring the receiver over to your house (your a paying customer already), you swap out the receiver for a few minutes and make the call to Dish and activate the receiver (with all of your programming now for only $4.99/mo). Your neighbor then takes the receiver back to his house, reconnects it all and VIOLA, he gets all the same channels you receive. You now have to of course work out a deal as to how much he pays you each month. But if you could cut your Dish bill in half doing this.......
> 
> Forcing the phone connection means every night when ET (your receiver's phone home) Dish can see the phone number on the caller ID and they can then verify that this number is connected to your account.
> 
> Its a smart move to cut down on piracy. It could backfire if enough people say forget it and switch back to the dark side (cable)


Couldn't they make it to where the dish/switches has a serial number or a code somehow that the receiver needs to match in order to work? That way if you take your receiver and you try that trick that ibglowin said, it wouldn't work?


----------



## Broadband Lab Rat (Nov 4, 2003)

I wonder what their policy is going to be about the 508 in my motorhome, which isn't even stored on site. ... so it's not gonna get connected to a phone line when in storage, and of course is not connected to a phone line when in use either. I'm on record with a RV exemption for distant nets. 

I have not received the letter yet. Has anyone who has received a letter discussed the RV issue with DISH?


----------



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

But what about people without land lines I dumped my baby bell for wireless and i will never go back!!!!


----------



## johnsmith22 (Jul 12, 2002)

I have read somewhere that Dish only enforce the phone line thing when there are more than 4 receivers on the account. No idea if this is correct, does anyone know?


----------



## Matt Stevens (Jul 30, 2003)

They are sending letters to anyone with 3 or more receivers.


----------



## wcswett (Jan 7, 2003)

Matt Stevens said:


> Not to mention I have DSL and reading the fine print on the Wireless jacks says they don't work with DSL.


I use a wireless phone jack and I have DSL. You just have to put a DSL filter on the jack where you plug in the transmitter. Works fine.

--- WCS


----------



## DJ Rob (Jul 24, 2003)

cj9788 said:


> But what about people without land lines I dumped my baby bell for wireless and i will never go back!!!!


It looks like I'm gonna be dumping dish. My wife and I only have cellphones...


----------



## orion7144 (Oct 22, 2003)

DJ Rob said:


> It looks like I'm gonna be dumping dish. My wife and I only have cellphones...


I just had mine installed last week and specifically asked the installer if I needed the phone lines hooked up to activate the recievers and he said no and had me call while he was there. They only asked for 2 numbers from each box (I got the 4 reciever deal) and they were already written down on a paper the company I bought them from sent me. Three of the recievers have no access to phone lines since they are down stairs and to run phone lines would be impossible and cost prohibative. I do have my PVR hooked up to a phone line since it is right next to one but all of my 301's are not even close. My wife would kill me if we had phone cables lying accros the door ways. She already complains about cables you can even see behind the HT equipment.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

Dish could make you tell them the location id of each receiver in your house during a phone call. But this would get time consuming for both Dish and the customers. It would seem like an invasion of privacy to get phone calls every now and then just so Dish could check your location ids. 

I had to give the csr all my location ids one by one when I tried to add a fourth receiver a few years back. She said that was to prevent stacking on peoples accounts. 

I think in the end this will backfire on Dish in people cutting down the amount of extra receivers on their accounts. Or people will just churn . If Dish wants to cut down on stacking , they need to come out with the 544 and 522. This way you could have a whole house media server. Then you would have no need for additional receivers. Then Dish could enable each tuner, extra then the original two, for an additional fee. They could still have their fees but no one could stack their accounts. Of course installs would be more cumbersome with running all those lines to the other rooms in the house. 

This would be one way to get around the phone line situation and give people all the tuners they need in one house, in one receiver. Dish could still charge additional fees on the extra tuners after the original two. Everyone would win. Now if you wanted to have s-video and rca jacks to each tv , that could really get expensive and cumbersome to Dish.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I've seen folks say that they'll be leaving E* for D* over this phone line requirement. I don't get it since D* has the same type of requirement in their customer agreement:

*(f) Additional Receivers. If you add additional receivers to your account, you may purchase a separate subscription for each one. Or, if all your receivers are continuously connected to the same land-based phone line, we can "mirror" the programming from your primary receiver to your additional receivers and charge you only the additional receiver fee amount described in Section 2. Pay per view programming cannot be mirrored and can be viewed only on the receiver for which it is purchased*

OK, so you spend the $'s to switch to D* and a month or two later they decide to pull the same trick, what do you do then? Sorry, but I don't see why folks are getting up in arms about something that was in their customer agreement when they got E*. Yea, they might have let folks slide on the requirement but it's not like they just added the clause now. From what I've seen, E* is trying to work with folks that don't have a phone jack near by by providing wireless phone line extenders at no cost.


----------



## DishNet_Fan (Oct 14, 2003)

What kills me is the inconsistent messages. No one's on the same page on anything. Installers/contracted partners tell you one thing, csr's say something else, and then Dish/Charlie tells you another thing. Dish has no idea what their staff or contracted partners may say next. Whether it be the phone line issue, SuperDish, new equipment - it's become a mockery. 

Think about it....What if your company's CEO said one thing, your staff told clients something else, and your contracted partners were saying something completely different. Your company would lose major credibility, respect and probably market share. Plus, the public usually never forgets when you have problems/make mistakes. I believe Dish is entering a crucial time in the next 6 - 12 months (SuperDish, landslide of new equipment, pricing, etc.) and they better make sure they are ready.... :eek2:


----------



## Tom_P (May 8, 2002)

Ok, so Dish can provide customers with wireless devices free of charge, but the question what's gonna happen for people like me who only had cell phones. Are they going to pay for my land line? Don't think so...


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Tom_P said:


> Ok, so Dish can provide customers with wireless devices free of charge, but the question what's gonna happen for people like me who only had cell phones. Are they going to pay for my land line? Don't think so...


Yep, they probably won't pay for land lines. I agree that it's a pain that they've now decided to enforce the provision in their customer agreement but it's something that's always been there so it's something that you should have been worried about. I know I've thought about dumping my land line and using VOIP or cell phone but between needing a land line for my security system and the DBS hardware it's not an option.


----------



## jimmoc (Sep 22, 2003)

So what happens like in my case where the kids have a receiver installed in their bedroom but they also have a seperate phone line in there that the dish is connected to? I guess if Dish actually looked the phone numbers up they could tell they were in the same house but otherwise it's going to be reporting two different numbers and names.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jimmoc said:


> So what happens like in my case where the kids have a receiver installed in their bedroom but they also have a seperate phone line in there that the dish is connected to? I guess if Dish actually looked the phone numbers up they could tell they were in the same house but otherwise it's going to be reporting two different numbers and names.


What you could do for them, assuming that all the cable pairs aren't being used on the run to that room, is wire up a spare pair onto the 'main' number and connect the STB to that seperate jack.


----------



## AllieVi (Apr 10, 2002)

DishNet_Fan said:


> Think about it....What if your company's CEO said one thing, your staff told clients something else, and your contracted partners were saying something completely different.


In a case like this, everyone would have to revert to what was agreed to in writing...


----------



## Broadband Lab Rat (Nov 4, 2003)

The 508 in my motorhome is gonna need a **really** long range wireless device to connect to my house phone line...


----------



## Darkman (Apr 16, 2002)

JohnH - how did your 16 ird-phone test went? 

Lol - did you enjoy it?


----------



## DishNet_Fan (Oct 14, 2003)

AllieVi said:


> In a case like this, everyone would have to revert to what was agreed to in writing...


AllieVi:

I understand your position, put the point is much broader than "whether my receiver is connected to a phone line". Dish has continued to allow inconsistencies over the years, whether it be the phone line issue, csr's saying something different everytime you call, etc. Another thing that is disturbing to me, and others, is the way they are handling the SuperDish issue.

1. First it's one size. Oh, sorry, it's actually much bigger than we thought.
2. There won't any mounting problems. Oh wait, we won't mount it on a roof, chimney, etc. 
3. It will be rolling out this fall. No, sorry, November 1. Wait, probably late 4th quarter.

When will it end? Don't misuderstand me, I like the programming and enjoy my channels. I just can't understand why Charlie & Co. are so screwed up. :nono2: They need to get their sh*t together or DirecTV and cable (yes, cable! :lol: ) will overtake their membership.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

This is just Dish's way of fixing Stackers.

Like hackers they are illegally taking service and giving it to other family and friends some for free ,and some are mini cable companies. Some people are charging a fee on each receiver to pay for their subscription and then some. 

This is a reasonable request and the fact that Dish is trying to give all wireless jacks for free , shows they are trying. If you have no land based line or don't want to then Dish has two alternatives: they can let it go on like it is, or they can limit you to one receiver on your account. 

It will cost Dish in the short term in additional receiver fees and angry customers. But from now on, if they enforce the phone rule then it will stop stackers. Just like hackers it is illegal and is it really fair for others to get service for free or at a reduced cost ,when we have to pay for it? 

Just like the dvr fees everyone was mad about just two months ago, this to will pass. Life will go on. So will Dishnetwork.


----------



## AllieVi (Apr 10, 2002)

DishNet_Fan said:


> AllieVi:
> 
> I understand your position, put the point is much broader than "whether my receiver is connected to a phone line". Dish has continued to allow inconsistencies over the years, whether it be the phone line issue, csr's saying something different everytime you call, etc. Another thing that is disturbing to me, and others, is the way they are handling the SuperDish issue.
> 
> ...


I understand and agree 100% with your E* frustration. It often seems that they are not following a grand plan, but making things up as they go along.

The phone line requirement is a different animal, though. It's a policy that we all agreed to from the start, but E* never enforced. I wouldn't be surprised if they are losing a substantial amount of revenue due to account sharing and now it seems that they are taking steps to tighten up a bit. Threats to leave DISH will be moot if D* takes the same stance.

BTW, none of my receivers are currently connected to a phone line... :hurah:


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

When I filled the Nelson panthlet out they sent $1 and filled out a total of two or three the past 15 years. When I switched a customer over from PrimeStar to Dish Network they had an electronic device connected to the PrimeStar receiver to collect the information on what the customer watched and they ended up getting a receiver directly from Dish Network that done the same thing since the one I provided did not have the serial port on the back.


----------



## nicepants (Apr 12, 2002)

I like dish...but not enough to pay $30-$50 a month for a land line just so that Charlie knows that my receivers are all happily sitting in my apartment. There is going to have to be some exemption made for people who don't have a land line. I'll hook it up to the internet if you want but I'm not paying for a phone. It'd be cheaper to send my receiver back, cancel my contract & pay whatever fees there are. (Not to mention I wouldn't have telemarketers calling me all day long trying to sell me satellite dishes)


----------



## rocco (Jun 7, 2003)

Does anyone have the telephone# from the letter. When I received mine on Saturday, I shredded out of protest!! Called 1-800-333-DISH last night to see what could be done. Was on hold waiting for a CSR for about 25 min. before a India girl answered. She seemed to believe that I could continue if I just de-activated pay-per-view from my account. I had no problems with this as I have HBO and Cin and have never ordered PPV. She then transferred me to tech to have PPV disconnected (40 min wait). Tech had no idea of how to do this. They directed me to call the 1-888 # that came with the mailing on Saturday. I shredded the threatening letter from Dish and now need the 1-888 # to resolve their beef with me! I have 1 508 + 1 301 connected to a live telephone line. The other 3 301's are not connected and I refuse to run a wire accross my hardwood floors.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

I already called and they are sending me a free wireless jack , so I don't have it anymore. As far as a way to offer feed back :
[email protected]


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

Correction [email protected]. My finger quivered on the a .


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

Broadband Lab Rat said:


> I wonder what their policy is going to be about the 508 in my motorhome, which isn't even stored on site. ... so it's not gonna get connected to a phone line when in storage, and of course is not connected to a phone line when in use either. I'm on record with a RV exemption for distant nets.
> 
> I have not received the letter yet. Has anyone who has received a letter discussed the RV issue with DISH?


I called Dish because I got the "LETTER". I have 6 receivers and didn't have them all connected to a my home phoneline.

I have since connected all but one 501 which is my "RV" receiver. I specifically asked how could I connect this receiver to my Phone line when it isn't in my home. The CSR or whom ever the individual was told me that this is an issue that Dish Management is still in discussion about and that there is no decision about how Dish will deal with this. In the meantime I was told that I was in compliance by connecting all but my "RV" receiver to my land based home phoneline.

John


----------



## n0qcu (Mar 23, 2002)

1-888-371-9077


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

rocco said:


> Does anyone have the telephone# from the letter. When I received mine on Saturday, I shredded out of protest!! Called 1-800-333-DISH last night to see what could be done. Was on hold waiting for a CSR for about 25 min. before a India girl answered. She seemed to believe that I could continue if I just de-activated pay-per-view from my account. I had no problems with this as I have HBO and Cin and have never ordered PPV. She then transferred me to tech to have PPV disconnected (40 min wait). Tech had no idea of how to do this. They directed me to call the 1-888 # that came with the mailing on Saturday. I shredded the threatening letter from Dish and now need the 1-888 # to resolve their beef with me! I have 1 508 + 1 301 connected to a live telephone line. The other 3 301's are not connected and I refuse to run a wire accross my hardwood floors.


This is a directly copy and paste from the letter;
"If one or more of the receivers on your account are NOT located in your home, your 
account is not set up correctly and it is important that you please call 
us today between 5am and 11pm MST at 1-888-371-9077 so we can resolve 
this situation. "

I did scan and OCR the letter and post it here under a topic called "New Dish Tactic (long)". I posted the letter in this forum as well as 2 others and the Newsgroup alt.dbs.echostar (all under the same subject name).

Hope this helps you.

John


----------



## gjrhine (May 16, 2002)

I think another finger quivered.


----------



## Neutron (Oct 2, 2003)

gjrhine said:


> I think another finger quivered.


I have yet to get the letter but I will tell them that I can't hook 2 of mine up because they are both not near any phone jacks.


----------



## Crazy 1 (Oct 21, 2002)

Mabe they will send you free wireless phone jacks.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

They sent me one for free and no shipping and handling either. I am now in full compliance with the phone rules.


----------



## rtt2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Do the wireless phone jacks work with caller ID?


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

It works with mine and I have caller id.


----------



## jlhugh (Oct 28, 2003)

I have been an E* subscriber since Jan '98 and I will not plug in a phoneline. I have a 501 and a 4700. The 501 has a phoneline plugging in but the 4700 does not. Even though it is nothing for me to climb up in the attic and drop a line behind the receiver in the wall. There has to be better ways to solve their problems. I also have a $40 PPV fight on there that I don't wanna send in yet. :lol:


----------



## Neutron (Oct 2, 2003)

Okay, I just saw a DISH PPV commercial that states this at the end:

"If you can't keep a phone line connected to your receiver, then call 1-800-DISH-PPV"

So I dont see how DISH could enforce this.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Neutron said:


> Okay, I just saw a DISH PPV commercial that states this at the end:
> 
> "If you can't keep a phone line connected to your receiver, then call 1-800-DISH-PPV"
> 
> So I dont see how DISH could enforce this.


Dish's customer agreement says that if you have multiple receivers that's when you need the phone line, if you have only one receiver you don't need a phone line connected to all of them.


----------



## gor88 (May 9, 2003)

I see that people with a VOIP phone line will have problems meeting the phone check in requirement.

My close relative, who is using my E* account to get locals because his address is just outside range of locals (one receiver only -- no stacking) wants to add an old receiver of his at the same physical location.
He has a new phone company, who we believe is using VOIP. My cellular caller ID shows a number almost all the time. His number won't show on my phone or anyone else's

Does anyone here know if Dish allows an exception when you have a VOIP line or does the receiver send Dish the location code for the receiver in the phone call, thereby validating the location without caller id?


----------



## gjrhine (May 16, 2002)

gor88 said:


> does the receiver send Dish the location code for the receiver in the phone call, thereby validating the location without caller id?


What is the "location code for the receiver"?


----------



## texas39 (Nov 11, 2003)

one of my receivers is upstairs, one in living room and another in the basement ..living room is only place that has a phone line..

Has Anyone ever had a computer from dish call them for anything at all? verifying or anything else they know of?


----------



## Karl Foster (Mar 23, 2002)

Aren't the installers to blame for at least part of this? Dish requires a professional installation of their equipment, yet they have this problem. If their installers would install the equipment and set the customer account up, they why is this even an issue. No phone lines - no installation. How can an installer not insure that the customer is compliance when he walks out the door. My in-laws had E* installed and the installer told them point blank that they didn't even have to worry about the phone line.


----------



## amit5roy5 (Mar 4, 2004)

DISH is making heavy profits, their stock is doing very well. They just want more money.


----------



## Tyralak (Jan 24, 2004)

btbrossard said:


> Not that I would care if Dish knew what I was watching, but it does sound a little strange to me.
> 
> Should I feel like someone is watching me the next time I watch Jerry Springer?
> 
> ...


Not to mention, where would it store that information? On DVR recievers, perhaps some hard drive space would be used, but on non DVR recievers there simply isn't enough memory to save all that info about your viewing habits. What channels, how long, etc. It would require far more memory than they have availible.


----------



## Tyralak (Jan 24, 2004)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> This is just Dish's way of fixing Stackers.
> 
> Like hackers they are illegally taking service and giving it to other family and friends some for free ,and some are mini cable companies. Some people are charging a fee on each receiver to pay for their subscription and then some.


Mini cable companies? Reletivly rare, and easily found out and shut down.



Mike D-CO5 said:


> This is a reasonable request and the fact that Dish is trying to give all wireless jacks for free , shows they are trying. If you have no land based line or don't want to then Dish has two alternatives: they can let it go on like it is, or they can limit you to one receiver on your account.


No, it's not reasonable. Especially when it causes a hardship on the customer. Treating every customer like a criminal is a sure fire way to lose them. Many customers don't have land based phone lines, or don't have a way to get a phone line into that room. This so-called "stacking" isn't as big of a problem as you think it is. It's likely just an excuse to force everyone to connect to a phone line.



Mike D-CO5 said:


> It will cost Dish in the short term in additional receiver fees and angry customers. But from now on, if they enforce the phone rule then it will stop stackers. Just like hackers it is illegal and is it really fair for others to get service for free or at a reduced cost ,when we have to pay for it?


It will cost them more than short term losses. Customers don't like to be crapped on. If they get hard nosed about this, people WILL vote with their wallets and leave E*. BTW, you sound like an apologist for this kind of behavior. You must be a big fan of the DMCA too. You work for Dish?



Mike D-CO5 said:


> Just like the dvr fees everyone was mad about just two months ago, this to will pass. Life will go on. So will Dishnetwork.


I see. So we just lube up and take it where the sun don't shine, and learn to LIKE it. Please sir, may I have another? :soapbox:


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

Since I wrote the above comments back last fall, I have since switched to a cell phone account and no land line. Dish has since told me that there is nothing they can do if you have no land line to enforce this rule. They do not look like they will be doing any of the above ideas I posted last year. The newer receivers like the 322 and the 522 do require the phone line or they will charge you an additional 4.99 for the second tuner included in each receiver. So it looks like Dish is finding away to get their money either way. IF they continue to expand the multiple tuner idea with multiple outputs to various tvs( the mythical much talked about 4 tuner dvr 544 receiver), then the phone line requirement will become a must or new customers will have to stear clear of these receivers. Who wants to pay for all those additional tuners included in one box? That would defeat the whole reason for getting the one box with multiple tuners. 

In the end I don't think Dish will try to come after the older established customers with this requirement. But I do see the future receivers being created with more tuners and phone line requirements. If Dish comes after you with a phone line letter simply tell them you are going with a cell phone account and cutting off your land line. Then do so. I have and it is very convient to have my wife and I connected with them. I also never get any telemarketers calling me on my cell phone. There is always a way around any rules.


----------



## morethanjake (Jan 30, 2004)

So what happens with those of us who have "moved"? Where I am is still in the same spotbeam as my service address, so if I try and use the "no land line" tactic and just read them the location code would they take it?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I don't see any problem here, if the code based on Greenwich Time and receiver number. No position included in the equation.


----------



## Link (Feb 2, 2004)

I had my dish network hooked up a few months back and the installers never acted like I needed to bother with a phone line for 3 receivers unless i wanted to see the caller ID on the TV.

I do know that Directv used to say they would charge you full price per receiver that was not connected to a phone. My parents never connect their Directv receivers to the phone and have had service since 1996 and never charged extra.

I could see where Dish would charge you full price per reciever if they couldn't verify they were in the same house, but I can't think they'd just cut a person off altogether.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

I got a letter from Dish and they did nothing. When I called them one day about something I just mentioned to them that I had no phoneline for the receivers and told them to put a note on the account that I would not be required to have them hooked up and would not get charged for an entire account for each receiver. 

I think Dish has found its solution for the future, multi-tuner receivers, to cut down on account stacking. Dish will need to make these receivers available to consumers though to make this work, as they only allow DHA customers to activate the 322 and 522 receivers at this time.

I would get 522 receivers to replace the 301's if they would have them available. I would think that they would offer special promotions to customers to trade in their old receivers for these new dual tuner receivers.


----------



## bigrick (Oct 21, 2003)

First of all E* need sto start paying installers for each phone jack added, say $10/unit or it ain't gettin done. 2nd, even if we do connect it what is to stop then from disconnecting it and taking the receiver to another home. The spanish seem to have the knack for setting up accounts where there are receivers at multiple dwellings. This is no generalization, I see it at the low side of 20 times per week. They are also masters of using kids names and ssn's to gain access to new accounts. I do believe the way to stop this is with a receiver with 6 tuners built in. Each tuner should output on a different channel so a single backfeed line could then be distributed through existing cables and remote tv's tune to their respective channel for access with their remote control. Furthermore, with this setup I think Dish could activate and bill you for only the number of tuners you wish to pay for. Or they can charge a monthly fee for the number of UHF remotes a person has registered to them, thus allowing the customer access to channel changing. Just thinking out loud.


----------



## jerry downing (Mar 7, 2004)

How could they monitor viewing habits? My receivers are usually left on all night when everone is asleep and all TVs are turned off. I will assume that these middle-of-the night-shows are recorded by them as being "watched" even though there is no one watching them.


----------



## amit5roy5 (Mar 4, 2004)

I noticed the 322s "download" the program gude. It is possible that this receiver records and sends veiwing habits.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

amit5roy5 said:


> I noticed the 322s "download" the program gude. It is possible that this receiver records and sends veiwing habits.


The download comes from the satellite feed, no phone line needed, receive only. Your viewing habits could be tracked and called in on the phone line with your PPV purchases, if there is enough memory to store such things and you are paranoid enough to worry about it.

JL


----------



## amit5roy5 (Mar 4, 2004)

What I mean is, your recording habits could be recorded and sent to DISH.



justalurker said:


> The download comes from the satellite feed, no phone line needed, receive only. Your viewing habits could be tracked and called in on the phone line with your PPV purchases, if there is enough memory to store such things and you are paranoid enough to worry about it.
> 
> JL


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

They should not charge for each tuner turned on if they implement 4-6+ tuner receivers, they should just have them all one and make it as if it was a splitter to split out to different rooms, each room having a different channel it runs on, or make it to where additional tuners can be connected to the main tuner, where it will only operate if it is connected to the main receiver/tuner going through the encryption to receive the channels.


----------



## amit5roy5 (Mar 4, 2004)

I think DISH has a method already to prevent account stacking. Charge everyone 5 dollars for the 2nd an later receivers. This way, they can still make up for the few 0.01% of customers who stack accounts.

The reason cable charges 3.95 is because you rent the equipment.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

amit5roy5 said:


> What I mean is, your recording habits could be recorded and sent to DISH.


That does not jive with what you said (and I replied to) ...


amit5roy5 said:


> I noticed the 322s "download" the program gude. It is possible that this receiver records and sends veiwing habits.


322's don't record, so your "recording habits" wouldn't be in play.
And given the right programming and enough memory, a viewing (or recording) log could be created on any receiver (recording only on receivers so equipted), and passed back to Dish via the phone line. But to believe that it is actually being done requires a certain amount of paranoia. Which is why I replied:


justalurker said:


> The download comes from the satellite feed, no phone line needed, receive only. Your viewing habits could be tracked and called in on the phone line with your PPV purchases, if there is enough memory to store such things and you are paranoid enough to worry about it.


And, of course, the reason why I mentioned the download was because you did. It is two separate issues. 1) The receiver receives program log downloads via satellite and 2) Paranoids may believe that their viewing is logged.

Try not to get them too confused.

JL


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

amit5roy5 said:


> I think DISH has a method already to prevent account stacking. Charge everyone 5 dollars for the 2nd an later receivers.


Actually E* charges $5 for every receiver that they have to maintain the smart card/receiver ID pair in their database. That $5 is included for the first receiver on AT60 and above or DL subscribers, but is clearly there.

Multi-output receivers only have one smartcard/receiver ID pair to worry about - so charging $5 for the receiver (included in AT60 or DL) makes sense regardless of the number of outputs. The $5 penalty for not hooking up the phone line is simply an 'encouragement' to tow the line and follow the rules.

JL


----------



## lovswr (Jan 13, 2004)

ibglowin said:


> I have 4 E* receivers.
> 
> Have never, ever had a single one connected to a phone line.
> 
> Have never, ever had them tell me to do so or threaten to pull my plug either.


I'm with you. 2.5 years & I have 4 dish 500's. The only way those RJ-11 jacks on the back will ever stop seeing the light of day is if E* pries the crimpers out of my cold dead hands.


----------



## rpope02 (Sep 13, 2004)

Well I had to cancel because of this new rule, or idea they are starting. I only had 3, 301's and 1 811 all owned by me. I have been using wireless for two years and now. Called two Directv dealers and they are using this to sell Directv. I then called Directv and spoke with supervisor and all is going to be ok. They did tell me I would not be able to rent PPV, or any sporting events that the account will be locked out. Directv said I could still rent PPV over the internet, but would not qualify for Sunday ticket. Charlie is making a bad move!!! This is 2005 and several customers are wireless, or do have a phone line plugged in but you fail to support VOIP!


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

this may be 2005 but you dug up a thread from over a year ago??? I haven't had a phone line tied into my receivers (no home phone, cell only) for over three years and haven't had a problem!


----------



## chaddux (Oct 10, 2004)

Slamminc11 said:


> this may be 2005 but you dug up a thread from over a year ago??? I haven't had a phone line tied into my receivers (no home phone, cell only) for over three years and haven't had a problem!


This is a perfect example of why OLD THREADS SHOULD BE LOCKED. Newbies just absolutely love to dig up insanely old threads.


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

chaddux said:


> This is a perfect example of why OLD THREADS SHOULD BE LOCKED. Newbies just absolutely love to dig up insanely old threads.


 I agree!


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

On occasion I have had as many as 5 receivers with no phone connected. Had houseguests at the time. this place was a zoo, and very full at the time

Theres always the chance E will call you and ask for the location numbers, but it hasnt happened to me. Down to 3 receivers currently, and getting another dual tuner that should drop to 2 soon.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

I haven't got a letter, but only two of my receivers are hooked up to phone lines. The other three are nowhere near a phone jack.

They recently called me to have me verify my receivers, where they had me go to each receiver (including the ones plugged into a phone jack) and give the Receiver ID, the software ID, and the location ID.

Hopefully, this keeps me from getting the threatening letter. I don't want to hook up any wireless jacks if I don't have to (the PPV is blocked on all those units anyway via the password locks.........)


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

I keep my receivers locked at all times to prevent a kid, or neighbor from accidently buying as PPV.
Saw a kid do that years ago


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

By request, I am closing this year old thread.


----------

