- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Aereo: How can anyone argue this is anything other than theft?
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:27 pm to mchias1
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:27 pm to mchias1
quote:
a want, you realize OTA broadcasts were there BEFORE cable right?
I'm not convinced that a want understands the services that Aereo offers. He has made at least a couple of statements that were either misinformed or just poorly explained.
1
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:39 pm to moneyg
Copyrights are the question/problem - not OTA broadcasts.
This might help:
LINK
This might help:
LINK
quote:
Grappling with fast-changing technology, Supreme Court justices debated Tuesday whether they can protect the copyrights of TV broadcasters to the shows they send out without strangling innovations in the use of the internet.
The high court heard arguments in a dispute between television broadcasters and Aereo Inc., which takes free television signals from the airwaves and charges subscribers to watch the programs on laptop computers, smartphones and even their large-screen televisions. The case has the potential to bring big changes to the television industry.
There was a good measure of skepticism about Aereo's approach, sometimes leavened with humor. Chief Justice John Roberts declared at one point: "I'm just saying your technological model is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don't want to comply with, which is fine. I mean, you know, lawyers do that."
But several justices expressed concern that a ruling for the broadcasters could hamper the burgeoning world of cloud computing, which gives users access to a vast online computer network that stores and processes information.
...
Broadcasters including ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC and PBS sued Aereo for copyright infringement, saying Aereo should pay for redistributing the programming the same way cable and satellite systems must or risk high-profile blackouts of channels that anger their subscribers. Some networks have said they will consider abandoning free over-the-air broadcasting if they lose at the Supreme Court.
...
In the Aereo case, a dissenting judge said his court's decision would eviscerate copyright law. Judge Denny Chin called Aereo's setup a sham and said the individual antennas are a "Rube Goldberg-like contrivance" — an overly complicated device that accomplishes a simple task in a confusing way — that exists for the sole purpose of evading copyright law.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:45 pm to a want
I think this is worth repeating:
quote:
Broadcasters including ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC and PBS sued Aereo for copyright infringement, saying Aereo should pay for redistributing the programming the same way cable and satellite systems must or risk high-profile blackouts of channels that anger their subscribers. Some networks have said they will consider abandoning free over-the-air broadcasting if they lose at the Supreme Court.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:50 pm to a want
quote:
Copyrights are the question/problem - not OTA broadcasts.
This might help:
You just got finished saying you weren't interested in the legal issue...but more the practical issue. So, my comment was directed at that. I think everyone recognizes that the broadcasters want to have the right to charge companies like Aereo.
But, you said there are practical issues and the content providers wouldn't get paid. What are they, and how would they prevent the content providers from getting paid?
This post was edited on 4/23/14 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:52 pm to a want
quote:
Broadcasters including ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC and PBS sued Aereo for copyright infringement, saying Aereo should pay for redistributing the programming the same way cable and satellite systems must or risk high-profile blackouts of channels that anger their subscribers. Some networks have said they will consider abandoning free over-the-air broadcasting if they lose at the Supreme Court.
their argument is disingenuous because they want more money for doing absolutely nothing new. cable and satellite systems rebroadcast in a different way. they send signals through cable and satellites. that's why, say nbc 7 is actually channel 54 or 287.1 or whatever on their systems, not on channel 7. and they can put the screws to those guys because people want their local stations along with the 300 other channels they get in their DirecTV package.
aereo is using an existing, free service that the broadcasters currently offer. aereo isn't repackaging or rebroadcasting. they are taking the free signals that are sent through the air for free consumption by people who own an antenna. aereo sells an antenna. this antenna happens to attach to a computer rather than a tv.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 1:53 pm to a want
quote:
Broadcasters including ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC and PBS sued Aereo for copyright infringement, saying Aereo should pay for redistributing the programming the same way cable and satellite systems must or risk high-profile blackouts of channels that anger their subscribers.
Yup, they are extremely greedy, blame them, not Aereo for changing their ENTIRE model many years ago to one of corporate greed which forced the hands of the Cable companies to pay, for something everyone could get for free: "because the technology behind showing those stations redirects"
quote:
Some networks have said they will consider abandoning free over-the-air broadcasting if they lose at the Supreme Court.
they have said the same damn thing about the hopper dvr.... :crickets: they will probably not do a damn thing, because they are smart and know they will now be able to charge more for advertising, they are playing chicken, hoping the Supreme Court doesn't call their bluff.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:05 pm to BaddestAndvari
quote:
they have said the same damn thing about the hopper dvr.... :crickets: they will probably not do a damn thing, because they are smart and know they will now be able to charge more for advertising, they are playing chicken, hoping the Supreme Court doesn't call their bluff.
I agree with this. And, the minute one major network decides to abandon OTA broadcasts, it just immediately adds more value to those that stay. It's not going to happen as long as there is money to be made...and there still is money to be made.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:27 pm to a want
quote:
Some networks have said they will consider abandoning free over-the-air broadcasting if they lose at the Supreme Court.
If anyone were to fall for this statement, our society is doomed...geez
Ok networks, since the SC might say Areoa customers antenna can stay working, you are all going to abandon your business model of making money? LOL
What else did you guys expect them to say....this shows me more than anything the networks think their case is very weak...trying to use fear tactics now.
I'll make this easy, every one of those networks would shut down in one year if they abandon sending out their signal. It would cut their ad fees/revenues drastically.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:33 pm to GeeOH
quote:
If anyone were to fall for this statement, our society is doomed...geez
Ok networks, since the SC might say Areoa customers antenna can stay working, you are all going to abandon your business model of making money? LOL
What else did you guys expect them to say....this shows me more than anything the networks think their case is very weak...trying to use fear tactics now.
I'll make this easy, every one of those networks would shut down in one year if they abandon sending out their signal. It would cut their ad fees/revenues drastically.
I agree. Either there is a practical scenario that I'm missing (like a ruling for Aereo would jeopardize other agreements broadcasters have with other entities), or this is just a grab for money that the broadcasters think they have a right to.
Aereo doesn't directly hurt over the air broadcasters. In fact, it helps them.
I asked a want what the practical issues were. Maybe there is something I'm not seeing.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:35 pm to BaddestAndvari
quote:
Yup, they are extremely greedy, blame them, not Aereo for changing their ENTIRE model many years ago to one of corporate greed which forced the hands of the Cable companies to pay, for something everyone could get for free: "because the technology behind showing those stations redirects"
Can you convince me that an antenna I buy from aereos is doing anything more than having the antenna strapped to the side of my house, which, by the way, is what networks are ok with?
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:38 pm to moneyg
quote:
like a ruling for Aereo would jeopardize other agreements broadcasters have with other entities
I think it will hurt their negotiations with cable and satellite providers. And I think cable providers will look for ways to provide OTA to their customers for free as well. So the NBCs of the world will need to decide if they make more money per subscription off of cable or more off ad revenue via OTA. In the end, the current cable bundling model will continue to be challenged via internet based providers. Even if they win this case, customers will continue to look toward more flexibility offered via the internet.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:43 pm to C
quote:
o the NBCs of the world will need to decide if they make more money per subscription off of cable or more off ad revenue via OTA.
look at the budgets for shows like Mad Men, The Walking Dead, or Breaking Bad, in contrast to the budgets of shows like Fringe, Intelligence, and Revolution which are all shows that had / have "low budgets" for Network shows...
yeah, they make their money by being OTA, not a chance they give that up
This post was edited on 4/23/14 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:50 pm to GeeOH
Why should cable companies, etc. have to pay networks for content, but Aereo shouldn't?
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:53 pm to BaddestAndvari
quote:
yeah, they make their money by being OTA, not a chance they give that up
Have you guys just decided this is fact?
There are billions in revenue generated from cable providor fees.
quote:
At risk are the billions of dollars broadcasters receive from cable and satellite companies in the form of retransmission fees, the money paid to networks and local stations for the right to retransmit their programming. The networks have said this revenue is so vital that they would consider removing their signals from the airwaves if the court ruled for Aereo.
LINK
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:53 pm to a want
Why should cable companies pay networks??
the only reason they do is b/c the networks have them over a barrel. they won't let them send out the OTA signals for free b/c cable companies want the other channels owned by the networks. it's not Aereo's fault that cable companies are raped by network providers.
the only reason they do is b/c the networks have them over a barrel. they won't let them send out the OTA signals for free b/c cable companies want the other channels owned by the networks. it's not Aereo's fault that cable companies are raped by network providers.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 2:59 pm to a want
quote:
Why should cable companies, etc. have
because the Cable Television Protection and Competition Act is a steaming pile of shite and should go the way of the dinasaur
Posted on 4/23/14 at 3:01 pm to mchias1
quote:
the only reason they do is b/c the networks have them over a barrel.
and the only reason that is, is because in 1992 the US government forced their hand.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 3:02 pm to darkhorse
quote:Who sez he can't?
My father isn't allowed to have an antenna. Now what?
Posted on 4/23/14 at 3:10 pm to BaddestAndvari
quote:
yeah, they make their money by being OTA, not a chance they give that up
Fewer than 10% of household use antenna. Over 80% have cable or satellite. The value of OTA might be overstated a bit in this thread.
Posted on 4/23/14 at 3:13 pm to a want
quote:
Why should cable companies, etc. have to pay networks for content, but Aereo shouldn't?
What you are really asking is what makes Aereo different than cable companies. And, others are asking what makes Aereo different than an antenna company.
Does the fact that cable companies are bundling with other cable programming form the distinction? Is the technology Aereo using make it different?
You seem to have a pretty strong opinion. Where did you draw the line?
Page 9 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News