 PToN
join:2001-10-04
Houston, TX | This is good.... Arent they the supporters of "Dont cut your cable for internet stream or we'll charge you extra on your already handicapped internet connection" road map...?
I wanna see how they react, this is not different than Hulu and up to a point Netflix...
Can they say hypocrite?? |
|
| Greed! If you pay to watch it, you should be able to do so on what ever device you want.. |
|
| YES ! The content industry should sue ANYONE that is trying to purchase, view or even think about their content. Only if NO ONE will be ever seeing their invaluable crap will it be protected to their hearts desire.
/sarcasm |
|
 Jim_in_VA
join:2004-07-11
Cobbs Creek, VA
kudos:4 | Don't see them suing Sling Media ... and the Slingbox, where you can view programming anywhere, anytime, on any device.
--
... need help? »evdo-tips.com/ |
|
| What's the point? I don't see what broadcasters are so upset about - You still need to pay for the cable service and be at home with your cable internet in order to use the app, so it really just acts as turning your iPad into another TV in the house. How are they losing money from this?
Though kudos to Time Warner for at least making some sort of effort to adapt its business model, even if it is somewhat pointless. |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able Since the TWC setup for the iPad app makes users have both TWC TV & broadband access with TWC, all this is doing is allowing TV to be watched on a smaller device by those already paying to see it anyway. Hollyweird may sue but, just like with the remote server based DVR system Cablevision had set up, they will have a good chance of losing in court.
--
Record your speedtest.net results in DSLReports SpeedWave
»www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88 |
|
| reply to chsteiger
Re: Greed! NO ! In order to keep the spirit of fair and balanced initiatives against ebook piracy, customers should be charged extra if watching with two eyes instead of one. This is just to make sure that the cyclops, one eyed or maybe the blind might get a "reduced" rate.
(note: blinking two eyes alternatively at a high rate would be considered a DMCA violation) |
|
|
|
amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
 ·KCH Cable
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Too late I fail to see how this is much different from what can already be done with other methods/devices, such as, um, a Slingbox, or Media Center, or PlayOn...
OMG I can watch TV on my laptop... somebody call a lawyer  |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to Jim_in_VA
Re: Don't see them suing Sling Media ... said by Jim_in_VA:Don't see them suing Sling Media and the Slingbox, where you can view programming anywhere, anytime, on any device.
MLB is getting close to pulling the trigger on Slingbox:
»gizmodo.com/#!264609/mlb-calls-f···e-l-word
--
Record your speedtest.net results in DSLReports SpeedWave
»www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88 |
|
Jim_in_VA
join:2004-07-11
Cobbs Creek, VA
kudos:4 | reply to amungus
Re: Too late +1 |
|
 banditws6Shrinking Time and DistancePremium
join:2001-08-18
Frisco, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Linklist
Re: TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able This is what I was thinking. Time Warner only lets you watch TV content via their iPad app if:
1. You are a Time Warner cable subscriber who already has access to the same content via your cable package
2. You are using it at home on your Time Warner Internet service
Given those restrictions, there is effectively no difference between this iPad app and another television in your house. I imagine that's why TWC figured they could release this app without any new licensing or permission from content rightsholders.
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent |
|
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1 | reply to Jim_in_VA
Re: Don't see them suing Sling Media ... said by Jim_in_VA:and the Slingbox, where you can view programming anywhere, anytime, on any device.
Maybe Sling Media isn't big enough for them to go after...yet? Also, it sounds like this TWC app will allow someone to watch channels separate from what is being viewed over the TV/cable box.
With the Slingbox, you are only viewing what can actually be seen on a TV in your home. It's almost as if going after Sling Media would be like telling someone that they could not watch their program if they sat too far away from the TV. My viewing distance is practically unlimited now, but I am still just watching shows using my equipment and the channel package I subscribe to.
It seems that TWC is providing their customers with a new way to deliver TV content, and without permission from the content providers. I think it is silly, but I do see the difference. |
|
Jim_in_VA
join:2004-07-11
Cobbs Creek, VA
kudos:4 Reviews:
 ·Northern Neck Wi..
| With the Slingbox you can view any channel you have in your package, including live local TV, and anything you have recorded on your DVR ... anywhere, on any device. That is far larger than what TWC offers. Now THAT is tv anywhere 
--
... need help? »evdo-tips.com/ |
|
| How stupid Hmm, a company finds a clever way to encourage some subscribers to keep their cable TV subscriptions and the beneficiaries from this arrangement decide to bite the hand that feeds them?
They've got some real geniuses over there in Hollywood. |
|
PSB
join:2002-11-22
Petaluma, CA | reply to Linklist
Re: Don't see them suing Sling Media ... Did you really just link to a 4 year old article as proof that they are "close to pulling the trigger"? |
|
PSB
join:2002-11-22
Petaluma, CA | reply to jmn1207
Sling Media is a subsidiary of Echostar. |
|
b10010011Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA | I just don't understand why broadcasters and media "owners& in general want to restrict access to their product.
One would think that getting as many eyes as possible on your product would be a good thing?
I would even think it would open up even more advertising sales opportunities. |
|
| reply to chsteiger
Re: Greed! and this type of stuff is one of the reasons hollywood only sees maybe 20 - 75 bucks a year out of me.i used to spend thousands each year on entertainment.
now i buy a few boxsets of tv shows i support
all other stuff i buy used and physical.
i no longer go to the theater
MAFIAA gets very little out of me. |
|
 DavidNow accepting new patientsPremium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:78
 ·DIRECTV
·AT&T Midwest
 ·magicjack.com
·Google Voice
·AT&T Southwest
| This is kind of a thing I read about M$ They wanted the right to put into law or sue a company that uses vendors that use unlicensed software.
Actually come to think of it, it's on slashdot.
Personally myself, I would just be a good vendor and go for linux and open office... problem solved!
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this.
Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!!
|
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to banditws6
Re: TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able said by banditws6:This is what I was thinking. Time Warner only lets you watch TV content via their iPad app if:
1. You are a Time Warner cable subscriber who already has access to the same content via your cable package
2. You are using it at home on your Time Warner Internet service
Given those restrictions, there is effectively no difference between this iPad app and another television in your house. I imagine that's why TWC figured they could release this app without any new licensing or permission from content rightsholders.
a Smart judge would toss the case and tell them openly that this is no different than a second TV in the house since the person has to have at a minimum a "Double Play" of TV and Internet from TWC.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
