The Latest Buzz on IBUZ

Add to the discussion on the class-action suit building against HD radio this post from Rich Wood on the site Broadcast, billed as a “place for professionals to meet and exchange information and opinions on the art of broadcasting”:

— At 10:56 PM 9/4/2010, Mark Humphrey wrote: ——-

The problem is, iBiquity’s broadcast license agreement assigns “all risk of quality and performance” to the licensee (the broadcaster) so stations probably have no legal recourse. See section 5.3….”

I asked a couple of lawyer friends. A court decided that those software “agreements” were unenforceable because they were so one-sided. Contracts generally offer benefits to both sides. The benefits of IBUZ only enrich the IBUZ company. In the initial rollout of this fiasco someone mentioned that they required receiver manufacturers to reduce the quality of the analog to make IBUZ sound better. I don’t know if that’s true but it would be a serious ripoff of the 23 owners of IBUZ receivers.

Recall the original HD Dominion web site that claimed CD quality (a complete impossibility) and a host of other inaccurate “revolution” claims.

With all the testing carmakers do before releasing a product, it amazes me that no one, it seems, even took this kludge out for a spin. It would have been painfully clear it would cause their dealers serious headaches in addition to the headaches caused by listening to it.

Whether any of us believes there’s a chance the victims will win, the litigation will cost a fortune. The lawyers are looking for victims and witnesses. Since I’ve probably done more field testing than anyone and own 5 of those 23 receivers, I’ve been asked to participate either as a witness or a complainant. It seems they’ve been monitoring these lists.

I haven’t decided if I’ll participate or wait for a subpoena. If they use my market as a test they’ll probably have an air tight case. IBUZ here is an absolute disaster. HD-2 is useful only as an STL to feed a translator. The antennas don’t move and it’ll give the local engineers an incentive to actually keep it on the air. As it stands, IBUZ can be inoperative for weeks at a time on stations run by the industry’s largest corporations.

There’s a lot of money to be made here. I just hope I can get my lawyer correspondence course finished in time to get some of it. I’ll bet it’ll be in litigation as long as the BP lawsuits will.



2 Responses

  1. Oh, and last week I used this handy list to email all of the major media groups with links to Keefe Bartels:

    Bob, you can run, but now you can’t hide – LOL!

  2. “In the initial rollout of this fiasco someone mentioned that they required receiver manufacturers to reduce the quality of the analog to make IBUZ sound better.”

    I have read the very same thing in various message boards. This would only add to Keefe Bartels case against iBiquity and the automakers — sounds like fraud, doesn’t it? When this goes to court, Rich Wood, Bob Savage, and others will bring iBiquity down. I hope that the legal system gets a whiff of this, too, like the DOJ. The main point to this potential class-action is that certain automakers, with knowledge of the severe HD Radio problems, are either hiding HD Radio in expensive navigation systems where consumers are stuck, and/or forcing HD Radio standard as included in the cost of vehicles.

    I’ve posted in various BMW and Volvo forums, links to Keefe Bartels. In, I was banned for posting the link — that speaks volumes. I am licking my chops for that day Bob Struble is put on the stand.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: