In Supreme Court Brief, TV Networks Threaten to Reconsider Public Broadcasting

[dfergie]

According to the brief, "If the transmit clause could be circumvented through the simple expedient of simultaneously supplying each user with a distinct transmission generated from a distinct copy, then cable and satellite companies could potentially devise Aereo-like workarounds of their own, and in the process render the transmit clause a dead letter."

hollywoodreporter.com

 

[dfergie]

ABC Warns Supreme Court That It May “Reconsider” Free TV If Aereo Wins

What’s more,“broadcast television not only continues to carry the majority of the country’s most popular shows, but also remains a critically important source of local and national news.” Broadcasters would have little choice but to “reconsider the quality and quantity of the programs they broadcast for free over the air."

deadline.com

 

[riffjim4069]

The broadcasters are correct IMO. AEREO and others have been finding creative ways to steal licensed programming, which is a violation of copyright and communications laws. The broadcasters will no option but to alter their business model (e.g., the death terrestrial programming or altering/hobbling their OTA feeds) if this theft of service is allowed to continue. Then folks will really cry when they're having to pay $20 a month just to watch ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC. It should be interesting to see how this one plays out in the courts.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

It's not theft as you live in the service area and are just using an antenna to pick up those signals.

No different then put an antenna in your house. Unfortunately many can not do this because they live in an apartment or condo where you can't install an an antenna.


Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[riffjim4069]

I'll betcha a beer the Supreme Court rules AEREO's technology, in an attempt to capitalize on a perceived loophole, violates Copyright law. Much like a visit from the Rolling Stones, the broadcast industry will be shattered (shadoobie) if they lose this case as all the Cable and Satcasters will be moving to implement this technology in order not to pay the broadcasters billions in fees. Regardless, it should be interesting to see what happens.

It's not theft as you live in the service area and are just using an antenna to pick up those signals.

No different then put an antenna in your house. Unfortunately many can not do this because they live in an apartment or condo where you can't install an an antenna.


Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[dfergie]

We shouldn't be paying fees, the broadcasters should be paying us to watch their mostly c**p ...

 

[harshness]

As retransmission is something that the content owner has exclusive rights over, the argument should be moot.

 

[riffjim4069]

We shouldn't be paying fees, the broadcasters should be paying us to watch their mostly c**p ...

I say the same thing about commercial-laden cable TV: ESPN, TNT, TBS, A&E, etc. Nobody should have to pay for broadcast/cable TV that accepts ad dollars. But what do I know...

 

[dfergie]

I say the same thing about commercial-laden cable TV: ESPN, TNT, TBS, A&E, etc.

Some they couldn't pay me enough ...

 

[riffjim4069]

As retransmission is something that the content owner has exclusive rights over, the argument should be moot.

That's the way the law is written and how I perceive it. However, AEREO claims they are created a personal virtual antenna for each subscriber that doesn't violate copyright law as per a narrowly, and inappropriately, interpreted case involving Cablevision and their Cloud DVR service. Sorry, but AEREO is a subscription-based video service and they are illegally using the broadcaster's copyrighted programming for their profit, while not reimbursing the copyright holders one red cent. AEREO is going to have their heads handed to them on a silver platter...no question in my mind about it. The Supreme Court ruling against the broadcasters would have an even great impact as the formal breakup of Ma Bell in 1982.

 

[riffjim4069]

Some they couldn't pay me enough ...

Me too..I went these channels to pay me to be in my programming guide.

 

[dfergie]

Some shows like Judge Judy I see spots for hours after scrambling to change the channel ...

 

[mike123abc]

It will be very interesting to see how the Supreme Court rules in this case. I can see each portion of Aereo's case being legal. There is a line where providing a bunch of distinct legal services could cross into an illegal one. If I were a judge I could probably be persuaded to rule that Aereo is illegal. They are performing a service of bundling individually legal services into a paid service and making money off the copyrighted works of others in an indirect way. If they were doing it for free, I would rule that it was a completely legal free service.

It still comes down to them making money on someone else's copyrighted works. Even though they are doing it indirectly they are still making money on the network programming. They are not altering the programming in any way to be fair use (i.e. editorializing, or reporting news), they are being paid to provide copyrighted shows to their subscribers.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I see the Supreme Court voting Aereo legal. If they were bringing the programming outside the intended broadcast area then I agree it would be illegal, but again all they are doing is renting antennas to people who can't put their own up.

Its one antenna per customer, not one antenna for everyone.

If the broadcasters want to take their ball and go home then I say let them as their will be another group who would want that spectrum and would be willing to provide quality programing in the spectrum that was given to them.

Hell in fact I dare the networks to put up or shut up.

 

[mike123abc]

I see the Supreme Court voting Aereo legal. If they were bringing the programming outside the intended broadcast area then I agree it would be illegal, but again all they are doing is renting antennas to people who can't put their own up.

Its one antenna per customer, not one antenna for everyone.

But is is not just an antenna. It is an Antenna, a network DVR and Internet transport (like sling). Yes each is individual per user, and yes a rented item and network DVR has held up in court. Sling has not been decided by the courts. Now one could easily argue and probably win that an individual doing sling is legal fair use, but if a third party slings it for you is it legal? Also, if all three are individually legal does it mean that a third party putting the three together for someone is still legal, or has it crossed the line and become a service?

 

[riffjim4069]

If it's legal (which I doubt) then I'm creating a virtual sofa, and creating virtual wireless and VPN networks, and selling subscriptions so folks can sit on my virtual sofa to watch HBO, Showtime, ESPN and all the cable channels my guests can view while sitting in my virtual home. The hell with those greedy Cable Monopolies...they can kiss my nutsack, plus, the greedy SOBs will be making money selling more expensive commercial time. I'm not a cable thief, I am a cable industry money-maker.

Okay, this is virtual nonsense! AEREO is a subscription-based television service who is profiting from violating broadcaster copyrights. I would give AEREO less than a 2% chance of winning this case.

 

[dangue]

If it's legal (which I doubt) then I'm creating a virtual sofa, and creating virtual wireless and VPN networks, and selling subscriptions so folks can sit on my virtual sofa to watch HBO, Showtime, ESPN and all the cable channels my guests can view while sitting in my virtual home. The hell with those greedy Cable Monopolies...they can kiss my nutsack, plus, the greedy SOBs will be making money selling more expensive commercial time. I'm not a cable thief, I am a cable industry money-maker. Okay, this is virtual nonsense! AEREO is a subscription-based television service who is profiting from violating broadcaster copyrights. I would give AEREO less than a 2% chance of winning this case.

Your hypothetical is an epic fail riff. There's a big difference between sharing your subscription services with others for a fee and providing people with the means to access something they have a pre-existing right to (OTA broadcasts from their own DMA). (For the sake of simplicity I'll ignore any contract you signed with your provider that explicitly prevents you from doing this since no contracts govern the relationship between OTA broadcaster and viewer.)

Not to mention that you're missing the point that each Aereo subscriber has their own individual antenna and remote DVR. Your scenario is a single distribution to multiple people which even if OTA would be illegal.

Funny note about your scenario, the head of HBO or it's parent company (I don't recall precisely) recently encouraged people to share their HBO Go login credentials with friends. If I can find a link to that, I'll edit this post to add it.

Here it is: bgr.com/2014/01/20/hbo-go-login-sharing-policy/ So you can already share your HBO without bothering to set up your virtual sofa! Just don't charge for it!

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[osu1991]

Your hypothetical is an epic fail riff. There's a big difference between sharing your subscription services with others for a fee and providing people with the means to access something they have a pre-existing right to (OTA broadcasts from their own DMA). (For the sake of simplicity I'll ignore any contract you signed with your provider that explicitly prevents you from doing this since no contracts govern the relationship between OTA broadcaster and viewer.)

Not to mention that you're missing the point that each Aereo subscriber has their own individual antenna and remote DVR. Your scenario is a single distribution to multiple people which even if OTA would be illegal.

Funny note about your scenario, the head of HBO or it's parent company (I don't recall precisely) recently encouraged people to share their HBO Go login credentials with friends. If I can find a link to that, I'll edit this post to add it.

Here it is: bgr.com/2014/01/20/hbo-go-login-sharing-policy/ So you can already share your HBO without bothering to set up your virtual sofa! Just don't charge for it!

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

HBO’s CEO Doesn’t Care That You Are Sharing Your HBO Go Password

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mattlynley/hbos-ceo-doesnt-care-that-you-are-sharing-your-hbo-password

 

[ronjohn]

If the broadcasters want to take their ball and go home then I say let them as their will be another group who would want that spectrum and would be willing to provide quality programing in the spectrum that was given to them.

I have stated several times in the last few weeks that this would be the best outcome. OTA TV is now an outdated service. Free up the spectrum for more cell spectrum, a wireless internet spectrum, or some other newer service. If it were used for something more modern, people could still get video products, just a lot more efficiently.

 

[dfergie]

OTA is the only TV available for much of the country if they do not want or cannot afford Satellite, there should be options for those people other than doing without...