Why Aereo Should Win at the Supreme Court (Guest Column)

[Scott Greczkowski]

Remember the question before the Supreme Court is this...

The question presented is:
Whether a company "publicly performs" a copyrighted television program when it retransmits a broadcast of that program to thousands of paid subscribers over the Internet.

That is the ONLY question before the court.

There has been ZERO evidence shown that proves Aereo is Publicly broadcasting any of these channels. Instead everything shown has been the connection is a private connection for one person at a time. This one should not be that hard for the courts to decide.

Aereo is no different then the Master Antenna setups from the 50's and 60's before there was cable television.
Aereo is no more a public performance then you calling a friend on the phone and that person holding their phone to the radio so you can hear the song that's playing...

Its the same premise as a Slingbox. If I am connected to my Slingbox watching the channels I pay for and only one person can access it at a time, then it is a private transmission and not a violation of copyright.

 

[. Raine]

Remember the question before the Supreme Court is this...



That is the ONLY question before the court.

There has been ZERO evidence shown that proves Aereo is Publicly broadcasting any of these channels. Instead everything shown has been the connection is a private connection for one person at a time. This one should not be that hard for the courts to decide.

Aereo is no different then the Master Antenna setups from the 50's and 60's before there was cable television.
Aereo is no more a public performance then you calling a friend on the phone and that person holding their phone to the radio so you can hear the song that's playing...

Its the same premise as a Slingbox. If I am connected to my Slingbox watching the channels I pay for and only one person can access it at a time, then it is a private transmission and not a violation of copyright.

I'd say it's not at all the same. They are charging a fee for supplying access to material they don't own and are profiting from it. There's the difference. I call a friend on the phone to listen to a song, I don't charge them for it. The key words here are sell and profit, I'd say. On the internet, you can't just grab whatever media you want and distribute it for profit, that's piracy.

Can I sell what I receive OTA to my neighbors, the whole town? I sincerely doubt it.

The slingbox example, you pay for the channels for yourself, not others, not whole towns. We all should try setting up an Aereo setup and selling it to everyone in our towns, I doubt we'll get away with it.

I could be totally wrong, but to me it seems absolutely illegal.

 

[77TA]

Remember the question before the Supreme Court is this...



That is the ONLY question before the court.

There has been ZERO evidence shown that proves Aereo is Publicly broadcasting any of these channels. Instead everything shown has been the connection is a private connection for one person at a time. This one should not be that hard for the courts to decide.

Aereo is no different then the Master Antenna setups from the 50's and 60's before there was cable television.
Aereo is no more a public performance then you calling a friend on the phone and that person holding their phone to the radio so you can hear the song that's playing...

Its the same premise as a Slingbox. If I am connected to my Slingbox watching the channels I pay for and only one person can access it at a time, then it is a private transmission and not a violation of copyright.

I am just thinking of how that question would relate to an iks server if they could insure no two people were viewing the same instance of the same channel at the same time.

 

[goaliebob99]

That's a whole other lawsuit and case, so probably no.... Though I hope it'll happen!

I hope so too! I would like to be able to get Chicago locals where I am at.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I'd say it's not at all the same. They are charging a fee for supplying access to material they don't own and are profiting from it. There's the difference. I call a friend on the phone to listen to a song, I don't charge them for it. The key words here are sell and profit, I'd say. On the internet, you can't just grab whatever media you want and distribute it for profit, that's piracy.

Can I sell what I receive OTA to my neighbors, the whole town? I sincerely doubt it.

But that is what they did. And no one said boo. Stations were happy to have the extra viewers. The viewers didn't own the antenna they just rented access to use it. No different then Aereo.

The slingbox example, you pay for the channels for yourself, not others, not whole towns. We all should try setting up an Aereo setup and selling it to everyone in our towns, I doubt we'll get away with it.

They can only get the Aereo signal and watch the channels when they are in the viewing area for those channels. They are receiving the channels free via over the air and are using their computer to access the antenna they rent.

I could be totally wrong, but to me it seems absolutely illegal.[/QUOTE]

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I am just thinking of how that question would relate to an iks server if they could insure no two people were viewing the same instance of the same channel at the same time.

The difference there is sharing keys is a violation of the user agreement, so the person sharing the key is being shared is in violation.

But this is not the place to talk about IKS so we will end the IKS talk here.

 

[Tampa8]

Amicus brief filed ... http://www.americanbar.org/content/...-v3/13-461_resp_amcu_36ipclp.authcheckdam.pdf

They talk about two things I posted about. That comparing Aereo to a cable company is incorrect and they do not fall under the same restrictions, thus my answer to why DISH and the others don't just do this. And also that this about technology, exactly like the DVR cases of years ago. As Scott said this is very interesting to read.

 

[. Raine]

But that is what they did. And no one said boo. Stations were happy to have the extra viewers. The viewers didn't own the antenna they just rented access to use it. No different then Aereo.

They can only get the Aereo signal and watch the channels when they are in the viewing area for those channels. They are receiving the channels free via over the air and are using their computer to access the antenna they rent.

I could be totally wrong, but to me it seems absolutely illegal.

[/QUOTE]

I can see the grey area here, definitely. But if Aereo wins, it's gonna be a hell of a mess from there on out because anything broadcast free could be rebroadcast in the way that Aereo does, for profit. Aereo will definitely have lots of company, if they win. To me, it kinda looks like the writing is on the wall for a lot of free broadcasting, if they win.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I can see the grey area here, definitely. But if Aereo wins, it's gonna be a hell of a mess from there on out because anything broadcast free could be rebroadcast in the way that Aereo does, for profit. Aereo will definitely have lots of company, if they win. To me, it kinda looks like the writing is on the wall for a lot of free broadcasting, if they win.

The way I see it is that no matter what Aereo Loses. If Aereo losses they are done.... if Aereo wins then the networks will fight back by selling their programming direct to the customer at a price lower then Aereo forcing them out of business.

 

[. Raine]

The way I see it is that no matter what Aereo Loses. If Aereo losses they are done.... if Aereo wins then the networks will fight back by selling their programming direct to the customer at a price lower then Aereo forcing them out of business.

Yeah, truly a no win situation for them.

 

[Need]

The way I see it is that no matter what Aereo Loses. If Aereo losses they are done.... if Aereo wins then the networks will fight back by selling their programming direct to the customer at a price lower then Aereo forcing them out of business.

Well but Aereo is a package deal though. You get ALL the network channels + DVR for $8 or whatever they charge. I don't see all the networks come together and offer that. They will probably offer streaming live for free, but if you need DVR, you will need to pay each network. Cable and Satellite will be able to offer the same as Aereo but I think the price will be about the same. I think no matter what Aereo won already.. years later they will be remembered as a hero who transformed how we watch TV...

 

[dfergie]

Aereo Backstory: One Supreme Court Case, Three Recusals, One 'Unrecusal,' Much Uncertainty

As Aereo and the broadcasters face off Tuesday in a one-hour oral argument at the Supreme Court, one noteworthy aspect of the case is likely to go unaddressed: the presence -- and absence -- of several key players. The lineup on the bench will include Justices Samuel Alito and Elena Kagan. The lawyers at the podium will include deputy solicitor general Edwin Kneedler, but not his higher-ups, solicitor general Donald Verrilli or his principal deputy Ian Gershengorn.
Behind each of those individuals is a story.

hollywoodreporter.com

 

[mike123abc]

Well but Aereo is a package deal though. You get ALL the network channels + DVR for $8 or whatever they charge. I don't see all the networks come together and offer that. They will probably offer streaming live for free, but if you need DVR, you will need to pay each network. Cable and Satellite will be able to offer the same as Aereo but I think the price will be about the same. I think no matter what Aereo won already.. years later they will be remembered as a hero who transformed how we watch TV...

The "networks" already set this up with Hulu... That is their vision of how it should work. You can get Hulu plus and watch all the shows.

 

[jayn_j]

The "networks" already set this up with Hulu... That is their vision of how it should work. You can get Hulu plus and watch all the shows.

One would think so, but much of what is on broadcast is not mirrored on HULU. Much of what is on HULU is available computer only and not on plus. Perhaps if the broadcasters stopped playing games with their own service, Aero wouldn't have gotten a toehold in the first place.

 

[Need]

One would think so, but much of what is on broadcast is not mirrored on HULU. Much of what is on HULU is available computer only and not on plus. Perhaps if the broadcasters stopped playing games with their own service, Aero wouldn't have gotten a toehold in the first place.

Not only that, Hulu Plus does not have live stream and many shows are not available after it has gone live. If Hulu Plus was the answer, Aereo would not have worked. In order for Aereo to be non attractive, networks have to offer on demand everything and live stream and local news... for about $8.

 

[T134]

Not looking good for Aereo...

“Your technological model,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. told Aereo’s lawyer, “is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don’t want to comply with.”

It does seem they are more concerned about the cloud storage aspect though.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

But that is not the question before them.

 

[Tampa8]

Taking that quote just as it is - yes that is what they are doing. That is irrelevant however to deciding if Aereo is doing that legally. The U.S. laws are FILLED with circumventing, it's doing it legally that counts.

 

[dfergie]

Aereo Case Reactions: Did CBS Shares Fall In Response To Supreme Court’s Questions?

CBS was up about 0.8% this morning, in line with the benchmark Standard & Poor’s 500, until shortly after noon ET — during the court’s questioning period — when it fell sharply to -0.8% without a corresponding change in the S&P. Shares have begun to creep back up, but are still -0.2% in afternoon trading.

deadline.com

 

[dfergie]

Chief Justice Slams Aereo At Supreme Court Hearing

In oral arguments before the nine Justices, both sides took some heavy blows, but the Barry Diller-backed streaming service definitely took one to the jaw from Chief Justice John Roberts. “Your technological model is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don’t want to comply with,”
Despite Roberts’ comments, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer were by far the most inquisitive during the presentation with concerns over cloud computing taking up almost as much time as the copyright issue at the heart of the lawsuit filed by an armada of Big Media companies — including CBS, Disney, Fox, and Comcast’s NBCUniversal — as well as the federal government.

deadline.com