[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Supreme Court to Hear ABC v. Aereo April 22
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 06:44:27 -0500
Perhaps the media congloms are just looking for an excuse to kill FOTA
broadcasting?
Here is another way to look at this Bert. You have become a fan of Hulu; no
need to program your DVR, just watch the shows when you want via the Internet.
I have already pointed out the shift from "appointment TV" to VOD.
So is Aereo a "antenna service" for appointment TV, or a VOD service to replace
your antenna and DVR?
If the answer is antenna service, you are correct, the "local broadcaster" gets
more eyeballs. If the answer is a VOD service, then Aereo is competing with
HULU, and any other VOD service to which the congloms sell their content.
If the real end game here is to sell ads, or ad free subscriptions, to a VOD
service, then the congloms may have a point that Aereo is using their content
illegally. The local broadcaster may actually benefit from Aereo; they get
nothing for the eyeballs that are moving from appointment TV to Internet VOD.
So the bottom line?
If Aereo wins, the congloms may move broadcast network content behind the pay
walls, where it can be protected and revenues no longer need to be shared with
local broadcasters.
If the congloms win, local broadcasting gets a temporary reprieve, until the
Internet has scaled to deliver both appointment TV and VOD to the masses...
Regards
Craig
Regards
Craig
> On Feb 14, 2014, at 5:33 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E"
> <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Perhaps Aereo should counter-sue, demanding compensation from the networks?
>
> Hey, aren't more people watching those ads when Aereo relays the programming
> over the Internet? Maybe Aereo should threaten to allow complete ad-skipping
> on their PVRs, if the networks don't quit complaining.
>
> (Not that I buy this pretense about "different technology," with their
> supposedly tiny antennas, but that's an entirely separate technical
> discussion.)
>
> Bert
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> http://www.tvtechnology.com/news/0086/supreme-court-to-hear-abc-v-aereo-april-/223637
>
> Deborah D. McAdams /
> 02.11.2014 03:45 PM
> Supreme Court to Hear ABC v. Aereo April 22
> Oral arguments to be presented
>
> WASHINGTON-The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled ABC TV v. Aereo oral
> arguments for Tuesday, April 22 (not Monday, April 21). The case involves
> Copyright Act application to streaming of free broadcast TV programs via the
> Internet to paying customers. Justice Samuel Alito is recused.
>
> Aereo retransmits broadcast TV signals to mobile devices via cloud-based
> storage priced at $8 for 20 hours a month and $12 for 60 hours. Lawsuits were
> filed because Aereo does not seek to secure retransmission consent for the TV
> station signals it offers to subscribers. Federal courts in New York and
> Boston denied injunctions, triggering a cert petition to the Supreme Court by
> the plaintiffs. Organizations ranging from Viacom to the National Football
> League, Major League Baseball and the American Sicety of Composer, Authors
> and Publishers supported the petition. It was granted Jan. 10. The high court
> today announced its April schedule, including the oral arguments in the Aereo
> case.
>
> Aereo beta launched in New York in March of 2012 with financial backing from
> Barry Diller, chairman of IAC. Diller and Aereo CEO Ken Chet Kanojila claim
> Aereo is not subject to retransmission consent law because of its
> technological configuration. Pay TV providers such as cable and satellite
> services are covered under retrans law in that they take broadcast signals
> and "retransmit" them to many subscribers, making the configuration a "public
> performance," which is subject to retransmission consent fees levied by
> broadcasters. Aereo is renting tiny, individual antennas to subscribers who
> access the multichannel service through a cloud-based app, all of which Aereo
> claims is a "private performance," akin to the definition laid out in
> Cablevision, the case that established the legality of the remote, networked
> digital video recorder.
>
> Aereo has launched in 10 cities-New York, Detroit, Boston, Baltimore,
> Cincinnati, Salt Lake City, Denver, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and Miami. San
> Antonio, Texas, is no deck for a Feb. 19 launch. Recent reports indicate the
> service ran out of capacity in New York and Atlanta, though Aereo has yet to
> publish subscriber numbers.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Other related posts:
