Craig Birkmaier wrote: > My problem is at a fundamental level. IMHO, when a program is broadcast, > the content owner is being compensated for that performance. I do not > believe that ANY technology used to get THAT performance to a viewer > should require an additional payment to the copyright owner. The > technology is helping the broadcaster increase the audience for that > performance, which in turn may result in increase compensation based > what the broadcaster charges for the ads in that program. I believe this argument changes when the content becomes walled in, and is used to help attract more subscribers to a lucrative walled garden. An analogy might be hotel room rates. You can argue all you want that a Holiday Inn room in Kalamazoo should cost the same as a similar Holiday Inn room in Manhattan. But it won't. The prevalent costs in the neighborhood matter too. It seems logical to me that once walled up in an MVPD, the TV networks' content should command at the VERY LEAST as much compensation as ad-supported cable-only channels. So I'm not so opposed to retransmission consent. > I do not have a big problem with what Aereo did, however, they WERE > offering a presumably "for profit" service, which the court > considered to violate the content owners copyright. I agree this muddies up the water. If they were a non-profit, that would help. But here's what I really want to know. If Aereo service were unicast absolutely free, available only for the cost of the broadband pipe, and were kept within the ISPs of the local TV market area only, would the broadcasters still object? My bet is, they would. But it would not be in good taste to explain that opposition, I don't think. Bert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.