Time Warner Cable Box Rental Inspired Antitrust Lawsuit 291
EmagGeek writes "Matthey Meeds, a real-estate agent, was so irritated about having to pay the monthly rental fee that on Tuesday he filed an antitrust suit against Time Warner Cable and its 84 percent owner, Time Warner Inc. The suit alleges that, by linking the provision of premium cable services to rental of the cable box, the companies have established illegal tying arrangements. 'Time Warner's improper tying and bundling harms competition,' Meeds' lawsuit states. 'Since the class can only rent the cable box directly from Time Warner, manufacturers of cable boxes are foreclosed from renting and/or selling cable boxes directly to members of the class at a lower cost.' I pay Comcast over $25/mo for my two DVRs. I'd love to just be able to buy them or build my own. I can't wait to see how this unfolds."
Re:Choice is there, he just doesn't like it. (Score:4, Funny)
Property rights aren't always absolute. E. g. You might get some disagreement from a surprising source if you started exercising your property rights to remove your local cable provider's transmission lines from your yard
Yeah, Comcast got surprisingly upset when somebody took an axe and cut their cables at my property line. The cables were all neatly tied back to the nearest pole and everything, you'd think they'd appreciate the tidyness of it. There was no easement in my deed that applied to Comcast, so I refused their repair crew entry to my property and they had to route around me (in the power company right-of-way that they were supposed to be using in the first place). My property had a lot more curb appeal without their ugly, poorly maintained wiring draped over it, so I have no complaints.
At about the same time, I happened to find some nice abandoned coax with an integrated heavy steel suspension line, that was very useful to a project I was working on. Go figure!