Locast update

[NYDutch]

Locast has a "White Paper" about the law and their niche within the law. I am attaching it - great read!

I think it's worth noting that SFCNY/Locast did not solicit or write this white paper. They do not know who wrote it, and it was sent to them by a reporter.

Locast White Paper - Locast

The industry is taking Locast seriously. Apparently, some very good lawyers concluded what we’ve always known: Locast is legal. These lawyers even go on to say that Locast not only meets the letter of the law but does exactly what Congress had in mind: boost the reach of local broadcast stations...

www.locast.org

 

[Juan]

An entirely different issue that's irrelevant here...

Actually its the same issue...copyrights

 

[TheKrell]

Actually its the same issue...copyrights

True, but it's a different part of the law, so therefore the cases are different.

 

[Juan]

True, but it's a different part of the law, so therefore the cases are different.

True, but it's a different part of the law, so therefore the cases are different.

My prediction

One of 2 things will happen


The price of locast will skyrocket to pay for the copyrights

Or

Locast will shut down

 

[Yespage]

Locast has a "White Paper" about the law and their niche within the law. I am attaching it - great read!

I bet it is. I also bet the argument will be that the law was intended for redistribution of OTA the signals OTA in areas unserved due to either distance or obstructions, and it was a public service for underserved locations.

A lot of people though Aereo had a fighting chance too, and maybe they forgot. This is another one of those asterisk cases, clearly. Their use of the law does not fit with the intent of the law and it won't be hard to argue as such. It'll be up to the court to overlook it.

 

[Mochuf]

I think the most detrimental thing for Locast is the fact you have to pay a "donation" to make it fully functional.

 

[Juan]

With aereo..you actually rented a tiny ota antenna

 

[NYDutch]

I think the most detrimental thing for Locast is the fact you have to pay a "donation" to make it fully functional.

The applicable law allows charging operational costs.

17 U.S.C. § 111

(a)Certain Secondary Transmissions Exempted.—The secondary transmission of a performance or display of a work embodied in a primary transmission is not an infringement of copyright if—
...
(5) the secondary transmission is not made by a cable system but is made by a governmental body, or other nonprofit organization, without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage, and without charge to the recipients of the secondary transmission other than assessments necessary to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the secondary transmission service.
...

17 U.S. Code § 111 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Secondary transmissions of broadcast programming by cable

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Juan]

The applicable law allows charging operational costs.

17 U.S.C. § 111

(a)Certain Secondary Transmissions Exempted.—The secondary transmission of a performance or display of a work embodied in a primary transmission is not an infringement of copyright if—
...
(5) the secondary transmission is not made by a cable system but is made by a governmental body, or other nonprofit organization, without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage, and without charge to the recipients of the secondary transmission other than assessments necessary to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the secondary transmission service.
...

17 U.S. Code § 111 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Secondary transmissions of broadcast programming by cable

www.law.cornell.edu

It depends on what the judge thinks...and plantiffs love to go court shopping to get a favorable decision

 

[NYDutch]

It depends on what the judge thinks...and plantiffs love to go court shopping to get a favorable decision

They did the "court shopping" when they filed the suit with the only court having jurisdiction, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

 

[Juan]

They did the "court shopping" when they filed the suit with the only court having jurisdiction, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

So we wait and see

 

[NYDutch]

So we wait and see

Gee, I thought we determined that long ago...

 

[Juan]

Gee, I thought we determined that long ago...

Well golly gee...the expert is stumped

 

[NYDutch]

Well golly gee...the expert is stumped

"Stumped"? by you? Hardly... I'm agreeing that we won't have any conclusive answers until the court actions are completed.

 

[Juan]

"Stumped"? by you? Hardly... I'm agreeing that we won't have any conclusive answers until the court actions are completed.

Not by me

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Locast Nation,

We are pleased to announce we've launched our streaming local TV service into our 32nd market – Tri-Cities on the border of Tennessee, Kentucky and Virginia.

Available today, you can now stream 27 local broadcast TV channels across 19 counties in Bristol, Kingsport, Johnson City and the surrounding rural area.

For the first time, residents in Tri-Cities will be able to watch their local TV stations via the Internet on their phones, tablets, laptops, or streaming media devices. We work hard to provide a public service by giving access to important local news, storm coverage, emergency information, election coverage, sports, and entertainment programming to internet-connected devices. For this launch, we were pleased to collaborate with the municipally-owned local electric and communications utility Bristol Tennessee Essential Services (BTES) to locate our data server.

As a reminder, there are many ways to watch Locast – at www.locast.org, app stores, TiVo, streaming service providers Google Play, Apple TV, Android TV, Amazon, and ROKU, and on DISH Hopper/Wally receivers or select DIRECTV receivers.

We continue to work hard to launch more markets, so stay tuned. Please help us spread the word and share this message with five friends and family members who live in one of our 32 Locast markets. We are a nonprofit and rely on user donations of just $5 per month to support the ongoing operations and expansion of our nonprofit service.

Thank you!

 

[JosephB]

I believe the more markets Locast adds, the harder it will be for broadcast attorneys to win their case. I'm sure Locast has high-priced attorneys of their own.

Why would the number of markets matter? They do not allow you to view out of market locals. To view Atlanta locals, you have to be located in the Atlanta market, for example. The law doesn't say that the non-profit organization can't be a large one serving multiple markets.

Based on the law, it sounds like the exemption they are trying to fall under was most likely intended for local rebroadcast in areas not within reach or are blocked geographically from the services by the original tower. The more cities they serve, the less they are remotely falling under these guidelines. Having a Board of Directors probably doesn't help as well.

They don't allow you to view out-of-market locals. They aren't providing channels for people who are not in a given market. They are actually completely within those guidelines

Also, not sure what you mean by Board of Directors. Basically every non-profit has a Board of Directors, it's actually a sign that they are a legitimate operation and not just some guy operating out of his mom's basement. The YMCA, the Red Cross, The American Cancer Society, they are all non-profits, they all have very high profile boards of directors

I think Locast should be legal, but I have a doubt thinking they'll be found as such. This would be a great time for the FCC to address the locals redistribution issues faced by Cable/Sat for the last decade plus since DVRs became typical.

For changes to be made, it will require changes to the law. Not something the FCC is going to be able to do on their own, because most of the issue here is in copyright law not in licensing handled by the FCC

Probably a "guilty by association" thing.

Guilty of what? What has Dish done that is illegal?

I also bet the argument will be that the law was intended for redistribution of OTA the signals OTA in areas unserved due to either distance or obstructions, and it was a public service for underserved locations.

That is exactly the argument, and I'm not sure how anyone would be able to argue otherwise. Just because AT&T donated money doesn't make them any less a non-profit or the fact that they are serving a public service by being a "translator" for the OTA signals. AT&T donates to many non-profits, doesn't make any of them any less legitimate

 

[comfortably_numb]

Guilty of what? What has Dish done that is illegal?

I'm not saying they've done anything illegal. I'm saying they've been in the hot seat with the FCC before.

 

[NYDutch]

I'm not saying they've done anything illegal. I'm saying they've been in the hot seat with the FCC before.

But this lawsuit is not an FCC matter... And SFCNY has a former Deputy Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs for the FCC on their board as well as Chairman David Goodfriend being a former Media Legal Advisor to an FCC commissioner.

 

[NYDutch]

Why would the number of markets matter? They do not allow you to view out of market locals. To view Atlanta locals, you have to be located in the Atlanta market, for example. The law doesn't say that the non-profit organization can't be a large one serving multiple markets.

I don't think the fact that Locast serves 32 markets covering more than 50% of the US population will hurt their case. The fact that any given person typically only has access to their own geo-locked market is also a plus as I see it.