Supreme Court To Rule on Aereo, an Obscure Company That Could Reshape the TV Industry

[InTheLight]

An obscure Internet startup is roiling the television industry with an old-school technology: The antenna.

The startup, Aereo, uses thousands of tiny antennas to capture broadcast television programs, then converts the shows into online video streams for subscribers in 11 cities.

What Aereo doesn’t do is pay licensing fees to the broadcast networks that produce the programs. And that has put Aereo at the center of a fierce debate over the reach of copyright laws, the accessibility of public airwaves and the future of television.

An Aereo victory could dramatically change the way people watch their favorite programs. Live sports and other popular shows that are only available on broadcast TV or cable television could be accessed more conveniently and cheaply over the Internet. That could lead many consumers to cut the cable cord in favor of a much cheaper alternative: a broadband Internet connection and subscriptions to Aereo, Netflix and Hulu. The average price of basic cable is nearly $100 a month. Broadband Internet plus subscriptions to Aereo and Netflix is less than $60.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...bbd1e8-c59d-11e3-9f37-7ce307c56815_story.html

 

[just-want-peace]

This will initially be killed (IMHO) by the vested interests, but down the road it will become too big for even the money to keep it quiet.
This of course is assuming that we have any similance of a free market left after the next few years.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Whatever this Republican appointed, activist court decides it will be to the detriment of the average American citizen.

 

[InTheLight]

Whatever this Republican appointed, activist court decides it will be to the detriment of the average American citizen.

You are turning into a bitter, bitter man. Here's some info to digest:

If you want to flummox copyright-law students, ask them about TV-streaming service Aereo.

Why? Digital copyright expert Samuelson isn't certain how the Court is likely to go on the case, which sets the stage for reinterpreting video and digital law in today's technology-laced era. The legal minds of Berkeley aren't alone. Professors from many of the country's top law schools say it's unusually hard to predict because the Supreme Court's track record in copyright varies, because copyright law is politically ambiguous and because an Aereo decision could radically change not only how the US interprets copyright in the digital age but also what technologies -- some of which are the bedrock of the Internet itself -- are infringing upon it.

Two of the nine justices illustrate the conundrum. Legal experts have consistently said to watch Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer to gauge the opposing poles of copyright opinion. Ginsburg is expected to be skeptical of Aereo's argument. She is one of the most knowledgeable justices about the Copyright Act, understanding the bargains that went into its crafting and often deferring to its structure and logic. Breyer is expected to be more receptive to Aereo's argument. In past copyright cases, he has been vocal in questioning the possible implications of the Copyright Act, and he is reputed to be an intellectual property minimalist.

The kicker is both are Democrats appointed by President Bill Clinton. Yet they are expected to approach the issue from opposing standpoints.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-the-aereo-supreme-court-case-over-tvs-future-is-too-tough-to-call/

 

[Aaron]

Whatever this Republican appointed, activist court decides it will be to the detriment of the average American citizen.

Kinda-like the decision upholding Obamacare? You gotta point.

 

[just-want-peace]

Kinda-like the decision upholding Obamacare? You gotta point.

Kinda like that blind squirrel that stumbles on an acorn occasionally eh???:smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin: