Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
TigerinATL
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Feb 2005
32817 posts

Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


quote:

Cablevision Systems Corp., one of the nation's biggest pay-TV distributors, has filed a lawsuit against Viacom, parent of popular cable channels such as MTV, Nickelodeon and Comedy Central.

At issue is how Viacom sells its cable networks to pay-TV distributors. Cablevision said Viacom forces it to carry low-rated channels in return for access to its stronger networks.

“The manner in which Viacom sells its programming is illegal, anti-consumer, and wrong," Cablevision charged in a statement. Viacom, the company claimed, "effectively forces Cablevision’s customers to pay for and receive little-watched channels in order to get the channels they actually want."

Cablevision went on to say that "Viacom’s abuse of its market power is not only illegal, but also prevents Cablevision from delivering the programming that its customers want and that compete with Viacom’s less popular channels.” The suit was filed in federal court in New York.


LINK

Have enough people started cutting cable that they care what customers want now?







Back to top
Share:
Dr RC
Tulane Fan
Dallas
Member since Aug 2011
13646 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


I like bundling.

there is no way in hell I could get all the channels I would want for cheaper if I had to buy them all individually.

the sports channels alone would top my current cable bill.


I also don't see how Cablevision has a winning case when they lead with the entire practice is illegal. A company should have the right to sell their products how they see fit.

Or should I get to sue food companies for giving me two more hot dogs than they do buns?



This post was edited on 2/26 at 4:22 pm


Back to top
TotesMcGotes
Virginia Fan
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
13895 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


It sucks, but it's not against any antitrust laws. Hopefully this case will change that, but I sincerely doubt it.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
TigerinATL
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Feb 2005
32817 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


quote:

I also don't see how Cablevision has a winning case when they lead with the entire practice is illegal. A company should have the right to sell their products how they see fit.


I agree that they don't have a prayer in court, I just think it's interesting that they're willing to go to court over it. Maybe it's just a PR move before a price increase.






Back to top
TotesMcGotes
Virginia Fan
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
13895 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


The better bet is to try and go through the FCC. This has already been thrown out of court numerous times.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
Teddy Ruxpin
LSU Fan
New Orleans, LA
Member since Oct 2006
18585 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling




If you don't want to purchase the bundle, don't buy the bundle. End of story.

What a bunch of pussies.

Hence, why I think this is potentially a PR move.






Back to top
TotesMcGotes
Virginia Fan
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
13895 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


quote:

A company should have the right to sell their products how they see fit.

Not if it is anticompetitive.






Back to top
boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
45284 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


Sherman act has some stuff about bundling products and stuff

I don't know if it applicable here, but I browsed it once and remeber some of the provisions






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Dr RC
Tulane Fan
Dallas
Member since Aug 2011
13646 posts

re: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom Over Bundling


but it isn't anti-competitive.

they are simply selling all their channels in a big group.

if they owned ALL of them you could maybe say that.

but they don't.







Back to top
  Replies (0)


Back to top