dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-04-17 08:39:36: After spending last week pouting and falsely claiming they'll kill broadcast television, broadcasters this week filed a petition (pdf) with the court requesting a new trial in their battle with the OTA streaming company. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


AnonMan

@comcast.net

I am tired...

I am so tired of this crap.

I think a law needs to be made that is flat and simple (yeah I know it will never happen).

The options for TV are as follow:

Either you make money off advertisement OR you charge a broadcasting fee.

You do NOT get to do both. We all know advertisement alone would pay for shows and in almost all cases does, cable fees are for the most pure profit.

If this model was followed more people would be able to have TV because only cost would be renting the boxes, paying a small fee to the cable co to manage the lines etc. but that would get more people TV thus more advertisement revenue...

Oh well, time for me to wake up.
The way I see it TV is less and less an entertainment factor. It's simply not cost effective in this economy. Why should these companies get record new profit year after year and keep raising prices while the value of our $ goes down and yearly pay raises no longer exists and if they do don't even cover inflation?

I wish more people would vote with wallets...

kaila

join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL

2 recommendations

'I wish this internet thing would just go the hell away'

-signed, the broadcasters


newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
kudos:1

We'll buy our verdict eventually

If at first you don't succeed, sue, sue again.

- The Broadcasters

SunnyD

join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL

Dear Judge;

You were wrong.

- Signed,
People who don't know squat about the law that got told what we didn't want to get told.


buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME
reply to AnonMan

Re: I am tired...

Where do I sign.

I Agree 100%
Ads or Cash not both.
Works Pretty good for Netflix and Redbox.

I'd go cash hands down. I might not get much, but I'll be happy living an ad free existence.


IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

I am with the broadcasters on this one

Aereo should have to negotiate a retransmission agreement with the broadcasters like every other cable/satellite provider. If they are taking a signal that I could get for free with an antenna and reselling it, then they should have to negotiate a retransmission agreement.

I get my local channels through DirecTV and they have to pay the broadcasters for the right to retransmit their signal so that is built into the fee I pay DirecTV for service.

I don't buy Aereo's claims of leasing an antenna, it just is not technically possible given the size of TV antennas.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.

Killersaurus

join:2012-09-17
I'd also like to see pictures of Aereo's setup. There've been reports that each unit has a "dime-sized" antenna, but that just doesn't jive with what I know about OTA reception. That just sounds like a bunch of bull. I have a ClearStream4 in the attic with direct line of site to the broadcast antennas at 11 miles with my house being on the top of a hill and there are still some channels that are troublesome. They mean to say that in NYC, with all of the multipath issues, that an array of "dime-sized" antennas, which could create interference among themselves, pull in all the channels reliably? Again, bull.


ClericVA

@mileone.net
reply to AnonMan

Re: I am tired...

A blanket statement such as we all know means little, please provide the numbers for the total income and expenses from developement, production advertising and distribution of all television programming. Then throw in the research costs for the cable industry whether it is for the developement of past and future generations of cable boxes IE: Wireless Media Servers or the amount it has cost companies such as Verizon to develop FiOS and it will cost Google to roll out Google Fiber. Developing the hardware and software to ge us TV, Internet and phone through a beam of light was not cheap. Then let's fill the cable companies call centers (most of which are here in the US by the way) so that when your 70 year old mother, can not understand that she has no picture on her tv because the TV is on but the cable box is off, or because her TV is on the wrong input has someone to call 2 or 3 times a month instead of you. I am also pretty sure you have never tried to talk someone who is clueless how to program a remote control over the phone and naturally they don't have a cordless phone or a corded one in the same room as the tv. Then let's talk about the advertising that will pay for all of this. If all of these expenses were covered solely by that your Gator Aid would be $5 a bottle and Frosted flakes would be $10. Yes the cable companies make a lot of money but they are publicly traded and need to generate profits or people would not invest in them and there would be no new innovations. However if you can please provide the numbers to back your statement I will be more than happy to retract everything I just typed.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to AnonMan
said by AnonMan :

We all know advertisement alone would pay for shows and in almost all cases does

We do?
said by AnonMan :

If this model was followed more people would be able to have TV

How many people don't have access to content available on a TV; cable and/or OTA?
said by AnonMan :

Why should these companies get record new profit year after year and keep raising prices while the value of our $ goes down and yearly pay raises no longer exists and if they do don't even cover inflation?

You're conflating two very different issues; rising rates for pay TV and the Fed devaluing the dollars in your pocket. Inflation isn't a concern....yet. You think you're paid too little and spend too much now, just wait


MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1
reply to Killersaurus

Re: I am with the broadcasters on this one

I'm sure they are not a 11 miles away, they are probably really close, less than a mile, and at that distance it's easy to pick up with almost anything.
Just because they don't have something like this for retail use doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

jagged

join:2003-07-01
Boynton Beach, FL
reply to openbox9

Re: I am tired...

given the ad rates for 30second spots for 8-10pm primetime yes. Then until recently the broadcast stations have to pay the networks cable/satellite retransmission fees to carry their programming


jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
reply to AnonMan
said by AnonMan :

You do NOT get to do both. We all know advertisement alone would pay for shows and in almost all cases does, cable fees are for the most pure profit.

Sooo.... TV production studios and actors and crew get to make plenty of profit, but cable/satellite companies don't get to make profit.

As long as you're deciding all these rules unilaterally, could you write out the details?


Brian_M

join:2004-06-19
Manchester, GA
Reviews:
·Charter
·Windstream
reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:

How many people don't have access to content available on a TV; cable and/or OTA?

Probably not many, but when you are one of those people (unwilling/unable to spend what cable wants, no access to OTA due to location), it's a pretty major thing. I'm in that boat... granted, each month that goes by means I'm less irritable about it, and less likely to go back. No skin off my back at this point, though I'll try out Aereo when/if it's available to me. Might just find that even at $7/month the value isn't there, and the funny thing is that it wouldn't be any fault of Aereo....

ricklerre

join:2009-06-22
Brooklyn, NY
reply to Killersaurus

Re: I am with the broadcasters on this one

said by Killersaurus:

I'd also like to see pictures of Aereo's setup. There've been reports that each unit has a "dime-sized" antenna, but that just doesn't jive with what I know about OTA reception. That just sounds like a bunch of bull.

Here you go:
»www.zatznotfunny.com/wordpress/w···rray.jpg
»www.twincities.com/portlet/artic···=4869549

Hanko

join:2001-12-28
Eatonville, WA
reply to Killersaurus
said by Killersaurus:

I'd also like to see pictures of Aereo's setup. There've been reports that each unit has a "dime-sized" antenna, but that just doesn't jive with what I know about OTA reception. That just sounds like a bunch of bull.

Look here and scroll down.

»www.digitaltrends.com/home-theat···for-now/

kaila

join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL
reply to Killersaurus
OTA signals get collected by multiple large rooftop outdoor antennas, which essentially reflects onto those 'dime sized' antennas.


Probitas

@teksavvy.com

I hear ya!

Charge me a fee and then no commercials, or free tv with commercials. I am so in agreement with this stance. It's not about rights or legality, it's about thinning the size of their corporate wallet. That OTA even works suggest they are making enough to broadcast it. Their issue is they don't want that OTA signal available everywhere, just places they don't want to lay cable lines.

Jerks.

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..
reply to buzz_4_20

Re: I am tired...

A re-hearing en banc is unusual in a federal court. This is grasping at straws.

On page 7 of the petition (thanks for the direct link Karl), the reason for desperation is apparent. Dish and TWC are considering partnering with Aero or implementing Aero like services, which would allow them to bypass the need to negotiate rebroadcast rights.

If Aero is just an Internet based antenna cable and doesn't violate copyright, a lot of cable fees for local stations could be lost.

The argument by the plaintiffs seems to be that Aero is providing public performances without a license. That wouldn't seem to square with the technology, they have a separate antenna for each subscriber, and provide that subscriber only channels they could ordinarily receive over the air. This isn't public in any way most would understand it.

Another court, did issue an injunction against another service. How similar that service is to Aero isn't clear.

The case enjoined is here - »docs.justia.com/cases/federal/ap···8-27.pdf it was a simple streaming of live television without permission, but apparently without separate antennas and without verification of residence within the area of OTA reception.

I'm not a lawyer, but the petition for review en banc seems weaker than I'd have expected.
--
Congress could mess up a one piece jigsaw puzzle.

turnerbrewer

join:2011-11-22
reply to AnonMan
I have voted. My family ditched pay TV months ago and could not be happier. Pay Tv is was not worth $100 a month to us. We only watched 5 channels at the most.

turnerbrewer

join:2011-11-22
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to IowaCowboy

Re: I am with the broadcasters on this one

I am with Aereo.
I pay TIVO $14.99 a month to subscribe to their service and equipment. My TIVO is connected to an attic Antenna. If I did not have TIVO I could not watch OTA stations as my TV does not have a digital tuner.
I understand that TIVO does not provide the OTA signal to my TV, but the equipement that I rent from TIVO enables me to have access to that content.
All Aereo is allowing me to do is rent access to an antenna and servers that will deliver the OTA broadcast to my house via the internet.



Xsquid

@madisontelco.com

A New Trial?

At least the broadcasters are finally focusing on retransmission, which is where Aereo is weakest.

It seems damaging to Aereo that they are negotiating with Dish to provide local channels to Dish customers, when Dish has to pay retransmission fees to carry those same channels, but who knows how the court will view it.

Maybe Comcast, Uverse, Fios and the other guys do the same? Hard to imagine how that might work, but makes it easier to understand why broadcasters are starting to sound desperate.

Something I missed, when did Aereo win a trial?


IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast
reply to turnerbrewer

Re: I am with the broadcasters on this one

»www.bestbuy.com/site/KCPI+-+Digi···=1953594

The fact that Aereo's "antennas" are not on the same site as the subscriber makes it retransmission.

And with TiVo, you can buy a lifetime subscription.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.

SunnyD

join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL
said by IowaCowboy:

The fact that Aereo's "antennas" are not on the same site as the subscriber makes it retransmission.

So wait, you're telling me that I would have to pay the broadcasters to watch OTA TV if I made my own antenna out of coat hangars and tinfoil and put it in a tree in my neighbor's yard because I don't have a tree in mine (with his permission of course)? Oh, and it just so happen that I gave my neighbor a 6-pack for being so gracious too.

I think not.

Chubbysumo

join:2009-12-01
Superior, WI
Reviews:
·Charter
reply to ClericVA

Re: I am tired...

Hollywood and content owners and broadcaster like to use "creative accounting" to make it look like their productions are losing money(thus, they don't have to pay residuals to their actors), so any number you get will make it look like you are right, on the surface. Until you start digging and realize that CBS is more a conglomeration of thousands of smaller companies, and each up the chain charges the lower ones a "fee", with production sets and such being on the lowest of the chain, meaning that they get "fee"d out of any money they would have made on advertisements, thus, making it look like it lost money, while CBS continues to produce record profits(according to its stock price over the last 10 years).


IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast
reply to SunnyD

Re: I am with the broadcasters on this one

Aereo is a shady operation in my opinion as they have no respect for copyright law. It all boils down to copyright law as Aereo has no right to rebroadcast, resell, or retransmit the content without the express written consent of the content holders. And Aereo should blackout any sportscasts while their operation lasts as the big sports leagues (MLB, NFL, NHL) can be a real angry rattlesnake when it comes to copyright law.

--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.

ak3883

join:2005-08-20
Portsmouth, RI
reply to IowaCowboy
said by IowaCowboy:

I don't buy Aereo's claims of leasing an antenna, it just is not technically possible given the size of TV antennas.

Ummm, you can use a paper clip for an antenna if you are close enough to the towers. TV antennas don't have to be huge.

SunnyD

join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL
reply to IowaCowboy
This would be a non-issue if BROADCASTERS made their FREELY AVAILABLE CONTENT easy to use in OTHER FORMATS other than just OTA BROADCAST...

You know, in stead of trying to shut down every every alternative means of viewing said content... maybe actually trying to innovate and embrace it.

dfxmatt

join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
reply to pandora

Re: I am tired...

the whole public performance thing was already decided at district court level, so I don't suspect that will be raised again. Meanwhile, their current case is not over - so asking for an en-banc hearing before even working with the current judge? not likely to go over so well.

dfxmatt

join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
reply to IowaCowboy

Re: I am with the broadcasters on this one

why yes, please tell us your interpretation of the law (which is completely wrong). It's not like we have judges whose job it is to interpret the law who disagree with you or anything, right?

/facepalm

your opinion of legal matters does not matter here. just leave.

dfxmatt

join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
reply to IowaCowboy
why is aereo magically shady? they're operating legally and judges affirmed that. i'm still waiting for your argument instead of moving on and accepting your own BS as fact.

the shady person is you. who clearly has a vested interest, a lack of understanding, or a deliberate lack of understanding. none of which are good for the discussion.