[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Aereo Argued, Waiting Begins

  • From: Mike Tsinberg <Mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:32:07 +0000

Can the same scenarios being applied to Slingbox? On their website they invite 
content providers to participate:
http://www.slingbox.com/get/solutions-mso


Best Regards,
Mike Tsinberg
http://keydigital.com<http://keydigital.com/>



From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of dan.grimes@xxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 1:07 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Aereo Argued, Waiting Begins

Perhaps I am mistaken about the individual antennas versus the array.  I did 
not consider that they were arranged to be an array, which would clearly 
constitute a single receiving antenna.  But I am not sure this makes a 
difference, in my opinion.  There are other elements that are more important as 
to what their business is.

I am curious if anyone would want to discuss some hypothetical systems:

Situation 1:  You own a computer, it has a tuner card installed, an outdoor 
antenna connected to it, and you have software that records programming.  You 
also have the ability to remote into the computer and watch the content and you 
do so only for yourself, not sharing any content.

Clearly, there is nothing wrong with recording a FOTA broadcast for private 
use, but does the ability to place shift the recording over the internet make a 
difference?

Situation 2:  A company has a bunch of individual, commercially available DVRs, 
with individual antennas and individual network connections, in a particular 
metropolitan area.  The company rents the box to you, there is a user 
verification portal, you are verified to live in the metropolitan area, the 
connection to your display is through the internet, and you pay a fee to the 
company that only covers the cost+profit of the hardware and services but not 
for the content.

Is it legal by all intents and purposes (not just the letter of the law)?

Is this acceptable to the Broadcasters?

Is it acceptable to the media conglomerates?

Does the location of the antenna and DVR make a difference?

Does the rental make a difference instead of owning the hardware?

Is it possible to prove that the company is not charging for content, only the 
service?

Situation 3:  All of the above in Situation #2 is true, but the antennas are 
folded into one master antenna, broken out into individual demodulators, and 
the DVR functions are folded up into one storage system and virtualized servers 
operate for each customer.  However, you still have to program your own 
recordings, just like a DVR.  You still only pay for costs related to the 
service and not for programming.  In essence the goal is to have the exact same 
service and functions as Situation 2 but is implemented into a more efficient 
and modern implementation at the headend.

What inhibits this from being legal or even desired by the broadcasters?

Why haven't the broadcasters done this already?

What would the media conglomerates have to say about it?

Situations 3:  All of #2 is true, but everything off the local FOTA is recorded 
and you can watch it VOD.  You still have to be verified as living in the 
metropolitan area.

Does this now cross the line and the company is now a media provider?  Why?

Naturally, there are numberous scenarios that can be drawn up, but I think 
Situation #2 clearly is just the displacement of the something already 
determined to be legal and fair use.  But there still maybe enough differences 
to consider it out of bounds.

I welcome your insight.

Dan

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2014