I just sent a complaint to the California Attorney General about ReplayTV - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 21 Old 07-23-2011, 04:52 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Steevo55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I had sent a complaint about Panasonic and the EPG issue to the California Attorney General a couple weeks ago. I got a response by snail mail.

I decided, what the heck, and I just sent one about DirecTV. DirecTV is the owner of the domain names replaytv.com and replaytv.net, so they have a high degree of involvement in discontinuing the server that is located at production.replaytv.net.

Quote:


I have a Replaytv digital video recorder, it records and plays back TV. The company has been through several ownerships over the years but it seems the current owner is DirecTV in California.

The ReplayTV has an electronic program guide, it is provided through the internet or through phone lines from a server owned and operated by DirecTV.

On June 15, 2011 I and all other users many in California received a message on my screen saying the electronic program guide service would be discontinued on 7/31/2011.

I had an expectation that I would receive this electronic program guide service (provided through a nightly network connection from each unit) for life.

DirecTV is not bankrupt and is not going out of business. None of the other companies that are attached to this lifetime service are bankrupt either.

They are Directv, a California Corporation, D&M holdings, likely of New Jersey but with California operations, and Digital Networks North America, also likely of New Jersey but with California operations.

But the issue here is that these companies sold these lifetime service units to many Californians and are not providing what they promised. They are aware of the situation but have not yet taken action to protect their customers.

If the Attorney General could intervene on behalf of California buyers of this ReplayTV equipment I would appreciate it.

News Release:
D&M sells ReplayTV assets to DirecTV
posted by jleavens on 12/13/07
D&M Holdings Inc. (6735.TO) sold most of the assets of its ReplayTV brand company to satellite-television provider DirecTV Group Inc. (DTV). Financial terms weren't disclosed.
Tokyo-based D&M said Thursday that ReplayTV produces digital video recorders for the consumer market. "Although we valued this asset and the business was profitable, the sale of ReplayTV to DirecTV makes the most sense for this business, its employees and us," the company said in a statement. D&M Holdings will operate existing service contracts for current ReplayTV subscribers for the "foreseeable future."

Steevo55 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 21 Old 07-23-2011, 06:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
adam1991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steevo55 View Post

I had sent a complaint about Panasonic and the EPG issue to the California Attorney General a couple weeks ago. I got a response by snail mail.

Wait--what was the AG's response???
adam1991 is offline  
post #3 of 21 Old 07-23-2011, 06:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
adone36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 37
He hasn't stopped laughing long enough for the secretary to send it.

Tony
adone36 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 09:17 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Steevo55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post

Wait--what was the AG's response???

I got a written response saying the AG was contacting Panasonic. I can't see any reason why the AG shouldn't also contact Replaytv.

If you haven't inquired of your state attorney general consumer protection division do it now.
Steevo55 is offline  
post #5 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 11:53 AM
Member
 
HopelesslyLost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Well, while I like the idea of feeling empowered that those on high are looking into this...I feel it's really like when VOOM went away. The gov't can't force a business to continue in an unprofitable manner, no matter what they promised. Things change, and we are just the ones that have to roll with it. Even if the gov't found them to be wrong in how they did it, which they won't, we would only get pennies, not our replay service back.

Have a great day!
HopelesslyLost is offline  
post #6 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 02:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
adam1991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopelesslyLost View Post

Well, while I like the idea of feeling empowered that those on high are looking into this...I feel it's really like when VOOM went away. The gov't can't force a business to continue in an unprofitable manner, no matter what they promised. Things change, and we are just the ones that have to roll with it.

True dat:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_harbor

For example, EFI puts this at the end of every one of their press releases; trust me, corporate America protects itself against the unexpected or unplanned:

Quote:


Safe Harbor for Forward Looking Statements

Certain statements in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Statements in this press release that could be deemed forward-looking statements include, but are not necessarily limited to, statements regarding the completion of the acquisition; EFI's customer and partner relationships; EFI's goals to better serve the industry; EFI's goals regarding its customer offerings, product portfolio, and target customers; EFI's goals regarding Entrac's geographic reach, market penetration, customer offerings, and product portfolio after the completion of the acquisition; EFI's integration of Entrac; and any statements or assumptions underlying any of the foregoing.

Forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual future results to differ materially, or cause a material adverse impact on our results. Potential risks and uncertainties include, but are not necessarily limited to, inaccurate data or assumptions; unforeseen expenses; the difficulty of aligning expense levels with revenue changes; execution of actions to reduce our operational costs and ability to maintain effective cost control measures; unexpected declines in revenues or increases in expenses; management's ability to forecast revenues, expenses and earnings, especially on a quarterly basis; the market prices of our common stock; the uncertainty regarding the amount and timing of future share repurchases by EFI and the origin of funds used for such repurchases; any world-wide financial and economic difficulties and downturns, including contraction in credit markets, and adverse variations in foreign exchange rates, that could affect demand for our products, and increase the volatility of our profitability, as well as the risk of bank failures, insolvency or illiquidity of other financial institutions and other adverse conditions in financial markets that could cause a loss of our cash deposits and invested cash and cash equivalents; uncertainty to accurately predict the outcome of foreign tax audits and determine our tax provisions; uncertainty regarding our effective tax rate in the future that may be impacted by various factors, including but not necessarily limited to new U.S. tax legislative proposals; changes in, or the failure or inability to comply with U.S., foreign and local governmental regulations, including import/export regulations or duties; failure to retain key employees; product cancellation costs; a significant decline or delay in demand for our products by any of our important OEM partners; the unpredictability of development schedules and commercialization of the products, including but not necessarily limited to those manufactured and sold by our OEM partners; variations in growth rates or declines in the printing and imaging markets across various geographic regions; changes in historic customer order patterns, including changes in customer and channel inventory levels; changes in the mix of products sold leading to variations in operating results; the uncertainty of market acceptance of new product introductions; delays in product deliveries that cause quarterly revenues and income to fall significantly short of anticipated levels; competition and/or market factors, which may adversely affect margins; competition in each of our businesses, including competition from products internally developed by EFI's customers; challenge of managing assets levels, including inventory and variations in inventory valuation; intense competition in the industrial and commercial digital inkjet market; the uncertainty of continued success in technological advances, including development and implementation of new processes and strategic products; the challenges of obtaining timely, efficient and quality product manufacturing and components supplying; litigation involving intellectual property rights or other related matters; our ability to successfully integrate acquired businesses, without operational disruption to our existing businesses; the potential that investments in new business strategies and initiatives could disrupt our ongoing businesses and may present risks not originally contemplated; the potential loss of sales, unexpected costs or adverse impact on relations with customers or suppliers as a result of acquisitions; differences between the financial results as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and the preliminary results included in our earnings or other press releases due, among other things, to the complexity in accounting rules; and any other risk factors that may be included from time to time in our SEC filings and reports. The statements in this press release are made as of the date of this press release. EFI undertakes no obligation to update information contained in this press release. For further information regarding risks and uncertainties associated with EFI's businesses, please refer to the sections entitled "Risk Factors" and "Factors That Could Adversely Affect Performance" and other similar sections in EFI's SEC filings and reports, including, but not limited to, EFI's annual report on Form 10-K and its quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, copies of which may be obtained by contacting EFI's Investor Relations Department by phone at 650-357-3828 or by email at [email protected] or EFI's Investor Relations website at http://www.efi.com.

adam1991 is offline  
post #7 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 03:42 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Steevo55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopelesslyLost View Post
Well, while I like the idea of feeling empowered that those on high are looking into this...I feel it's really like when VOOM went away. The gov't can't force a business to continue in an unprofitable manner, no matter what they promised. Things change, and we are just the ones that have to roll with it. Even if the gov't found them to be wrong in how they did it, which they won't, we would only get pennies, not our replay service back.
But that's not what happened here. Voom went out of business. Directv isn't out of business.
Steevo55 is offline  
post #8 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 03:56 PM
Member
 
brobin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
DirectTV never bought the ReplayTV guide update business, only the intellectual property (i.e. patents, processes, etc.). D&M Holdings retained the guide business and it is they that are shutting it down. Perhaps a class action suit against D&M could proceed but to what end? Unless one could get an injunction forcing them to continue they would still shut it down and let the suit wend its way through the courts.
A court action would go on for years and, if it weren't dismissed, ultimately result in a settlement that would pay the attorneys a lot of money and provide the customers with either a small payment or, more likely, something like a 20% discount coupon on the D&M product of your choice when ordered from them directly at full retail. IOW, we'd get absolutely nothing of value and still be without service.
UNLESS, you just sign up with LaHo or download WiRNS and pay $20/yr for a Schedules Direct subscription and enjoy your Replays for as long as you can keep them running.
brobin is offline  
post #9 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 04:17 PM
Member
 
nutzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by brobin View Post
A court action would go on for years and, if it weren't dismissed, ultimately result in a settlement that would pay the attorneys a lot of money and provide the customers with either a small payment or, more likely, something like a 20% discount coupon on the D&M product of your choice when ordered from them directly at full retail. IOW, we'd get absolutely nothing of value and still be without service.
Exactly why I decided to move on to something else & give up on my Replays.
Besides, I really hate feeding the sharks
nutzo is offline  
post #10 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 06:03 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Steevo55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by brobin View Post
DirectTV never bought the ReplayTV guide update business, only the intellectual property (i.e. patents, processes, etc.). D&M Holdings retained the guide business and it is they that are shutting it down. Perhaps a class action suit against D&M could proceed but to what end? Unless one could get an injunction forcing them to continue they would still shut it down and let the suit wend its way through the courts.
A court action would go on for years and, if it weren't dismissed, ultimately result in a settlement that would pay the attorneys a lot of money and provide the customers with either a small payment or, more likely, something like a 20% discount coupon on the D&M product of your choice when ordered from them directly at full retail. IOW, we'd get absolutely nothing of value and still be without service.
UNLESS, you just sign up with LaHo or download WiRNS and pay $20/yr for a Schedules Direct subscription and enjoy your Replays for as long as you can keep them running.
Only dopes get involved in class actions, which is why I asked the Attorney General to intervene.

You don't know what agreement is in place between Replaytv and Directv, nor do I. As far as I know they own the whole thing, guide business and all. They asked the old company to maintain the guide business and they did until now. Part of the deal during the sale. They couldn't turn it off then, they were selling lifetime subscriptions that very month.

One thing I do know for sure: the domain names used to provide the guide service, production.replaytv.net and replaytv.com are indeed owned by none other that Directv Inc.

It's a high degree of involvement, regardless of what allegations you make. You have no information, unless you are actually Directv's attorney and you have the agreements right there.

Are you their attorney? Do you have the papers?

If not let me know when you get some concrete information not based on speculation and guesswork.
Steevo55 is offline  
post #11 of 21 Old 07-24-2011, 06:59 PM
 
slprp1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steevo55 View Post
I had sent a complaint about Panasonic and the EPG issue to the California Attorney General a couple weeks ago. I got a response by snail mail.

I decided, what the heck, and I just sent one about DirecTV. DirecTV is the owner of the domain names replaytv.com and replaytv.net, so they have a high degree of involvement in discontinuing the server that is located at production.replaytv.net.
I feel that, in addition to the complaint about the EPG, it should also be specified in complaint letters that they mislead the public by specifiying that "manual recordings" were possible!
These units were originally designed to do scheduled manual recordings.
On the spot manual recordings are useless and I feel that they have been misleading the public by giving them the impression that a true manual recording (relative to the design of the unit and the description given in the manual and on the unit's on screen graphics) could be accomplished.

I'm not just blowing off steam.
They have been misleading the public (perhaps in an attempt to "lessen the blow")!
I feel that this issue should be taken seriously and included in any and all complaints to the AG (or other sources).
slprp1 is offline  
post #12 of 21 Old 07-25-2011, 03:58 AM
Member
 
brobin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steevo55 View Post

Only dopes get involved in class actions, which is why I asked the Attorney General to intervene.

You don't know what agreement is in place between Replaytv and Directv, nor do I. As far as I know they own the whole thing, guide business and all. They asked the old company to maintain the guide business and they did until now. Part of the deal during the sale. They couldn't turn it off then, they were selling lifetime subscriptions that very month.

One thing I do know for sure: the domain names used to provide the guide service, production.replaytv.net and replaytv.com are indeed owned by none other that Directv Inc.

It's a high degree of involvement, regardless of what allegations you make. You have no information, unless you are actually Directv's attorney and you have the agreements right there.

Are you their attorney? Do you have the papers?

If not let me know when you get some concrete information not based on speculation and guesswork.

Nope, I'm not their attorney. What do you think an AG will do? Make them turn it back on? Or make them issue a refund of all the Lifetime fees? Regardless of who owns the server domains, the guide update service was operated by D&M Holdings, LLC. Even if they were a wholly owned subsidiary of DN, which they are not, DN has insulated themselves from the update service as D&M is a seperate legal entity.
Look, I hope I'm wrong and I can get $299 back for each of the 13 units I have - but I'm not banking on that. Even if an AG could make a case, it would have to go through the courts unless a settlement were reached and that would typically take a very long time.
You feel strongly about this and you're going for it... good for you! All I'm saying is don't get your hopes up. I'd like nothing better than to see an 'I told you so' post in the coming weeks or months.
brobin is offline  
post #13 of 21 Old 07-25-2011, 10:14 AM
Member
 
ncbill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Those domains could easily be leased from DirecTV by whatever entity operates the EPG.

Had I set this up, I would have put the EPG service into a subsidiary with no assets - everything leased, with hefty 'licensing' fees paid to DirecTV designed to absorb any revenue in excess of expenses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steevo55 View Post

One thing I do know for sure: the domain names used to provide the guide service, production.replaytv.net and replaytv.com are indeed owned by none other that Directv Inc.

ncbill is offline  
post #14 of 21 Old 07-25-2011, 09:11 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Steevo55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by brobin View Post

Nope, I'm not their attorney. What do you think an AG will do? Make them turn it back on? Or make them issue a refund of all the Lifetime fees? Regardless of who owns the server domains, the guide update service was operated by D&M Holdings, LLC. Even if they were a wholly owned subsidiary of DN, which they are not, DN has insulated themselves from the update service as D&M is a seperate legal entity.
Look, I hope I'm wrong and I can get $299 back for each of the 13 units I have - but I'm not banking on that. Even if an AG could make a case, it would have to go through the courts unless a settlement were reached and that would typically take a very long time.
You feel strongly about this and you're going for it... good for you! All I'm saying is don't get your hopes up. I'd like nothing better than to see an 'I told you so' post in the coming weeks or months.

It's not a matter of hope.

It's more a matter of not going quietly.

They are big companies. They can address their misbehavior, and I am all for enlisting the aid of my natural allies. In this case, all you guys, and maybe the Attorney General.

Is there anyone else? Heh.
Steevo55 is offline  
post #15 of 21 Old 07-26-2011, 02:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
adam1991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Your wishing it to be misbehavior doesn't make it misbehavior.
adam1991 is offline  
post #16 of 21 Old 07-26-2011, 03:17 AM
Member
 
truckie36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NY State
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Back when all of this started I suggested that we all send D&M a brick for each of our replays. That thread didn't go very far. People were not interested in inconveniencing them in the slightest. Since then they were nice enough to release the keys and the gurus have restored the 4K & 5K replays. For the older replays it looks like a solution is right around the corner. Initially I could have complained about the $1598 I had spent on lifetime subscriptions, but now I am up $1196 with the 4 new never activated 5040s that were sitting in the closet. Now I don't ever need to worry about someone pulling the rug out from under my replays again as long as I can keep a signal going into them. Rather than putting all of this effort into a loosing fight, it would be a whole lot easier to implement WiRNS or whatever solution will work best for you. As for me, I'm done dwelling on what was, because the future of replaytv is now a whole lot brighter without D&M.
truckie36 is offline  
post #17 of 21 Old 07-26-2011, 03:42 AM
Member
 
brobin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think that really sums it up for most of us. If we didn't have viable options like WiRNS for $20/yr and LaHo (coming soon to a Replay near you) we really would have bricks and I'd probably be pretty p.o'd that I'd have 14 worthless machines - and more inclined to want to do something about it. But as long as there's a viable alternative to keeping them going, which BTW, D&M apparently condones since they released the keys to the public, life goes on.
brobin is offline  
post #18 of 21 Old 07-26-2011, 09:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
Space's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: NJ
Posts: 585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
For what it's worth, guide data that was originally cut off at 8/1 has now resumed normal operation and I have data up to 8/7...

https://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...php?p=20740718

Space - AB8NdtJzDULjgKvuDX3eJxHpXx88Xy9H
Space is offline  
post #19 of 21 Old 07-26-2011, 07:57 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Steevo55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space View Post

For what it's worth, guide data that was originally cut off at 8/1 has now resumed normal operation and I have data up to 8/7...

https://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...php?p=20740718

One would wonder if they got a letter from the Attorney General and decided to let it run until the issue is resolved.
Steevo55 is offline  
post #20 of 21 Old 07-27-2011, 03:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
adam1991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Your foil hat has a tear in it.
adam1991 is offline  
post #21 of 21 Old 07-27-2011, 12:28 PM
Member
 
newRTVuser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by steevo55 View Post
one would wonder if they got a letter from the attorney general and decided to let it run until the issue is resolved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post
your foil hat has a tear in it.
lol
newRTVuser is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply ReplayTV & Showstopper PVRs

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off