dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-02-20 08:30:19: US District Judge Dale Kimball of Utah has disrupted Aereo's string of legal wins by issuing an injunction (pdf) ordering the shut down of existing Aereo operations in both Salt Lake City, Utah and Denver, Colorado. ..


ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

Arrivaderci

So long Aereo, you get an A for effort, F for foresight.

jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

Re: Arrivaderci

said by ITALIAN926:

So long Aereo, you get an A for effort, F for foresight.

*shrug* They either win or lose. I prefer they win, but, if they don't: All it means to me is sell the Roku 3 on eBay and, when the weather or aircraft prevent watching OTA TV: Do something else. For us: All the broadcasters stand to gain by killing Aereo is losing us as customers.

Which is fine by me, as TV is mostly mindless chewing gum for the mind, anyway, and we'll save $8/mo.

Jim

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

Re: Arrivaderci

Please explain how broadcasters lose if you are denied Aereo. The commercials you dont watch via DVR? The money that Aereo doesnt pay the broadcast station to transmit?
ptbarnett

join:2002-09-30
Lewisville, TX

Re: Arrivaderci

said by ITALIAN926:

Please explain how broadcasters lose if you are denied Aereo.

Broadcasters sell eyeballs -- not literally, but they live and die by their ratings. If people don't watch their broadcast, they can't sell commercials, or must sell them at a much lower rate. If he decides to cut the cord altogether and watch something else, the broadcasters lose -- not him.

said by ITALIAN926:

The commercials you dont watch via DVR?

Time shifting with a DVR is a fact of life, but both the broadcaster and the advertisers account for it. It's not like it is anything new: before DVRs, viewers did time-shifting with a VCR, and fast-forwarded through the commercials. All the DVR did was make it more convenient. Before VCRs and DVRs, people weren't chained in front of the TV: they could do other things during commercials.

The big advertisers spend their money on product placement during the content as well: do you really think the producers of Hawaii Five-O feature a Camaro for free? Microsoft has been spending a lot on product placement as well.
smcallah

join:2004-08-05
Home

Re: Arrivaderci

Unless the OP is a Nielsen viewer, he doesn't directly go into the ratings numbers. That's the only way the broadcaster would lose advertising dollars, if they lose a Nielsen viewer because the person was using Aereo.

That's such a small percentage of a small percentage that it's almost statistically impossible that they'd lose a viewer that was on Aereo and a Nielsen viewer.
ptbarnett

join:2002-09-30
Lewisville, TX

Re: Arrivaderci

said by smcallah:

Unless the OP is a Nielsen viewer, he doesn't directly go into the ratings numbers. That's the only way the broadcaster would lose advertising dollars, if they lose a Nielsen viewer because the person was using Aereo.

Losing an individual viewer is not going to affect the ratings. But, Aereo is rapidly approaching enough subscribers in their service areas to make it statistically impossible there isn't some intersection between the sets of Aereo users and Nielsen participants.

The real question is how many of those Aereo users will return to viewing the broadcast via OTA or MSO. Or alternatively, does an Aereo user watch more programming (at work, mobile, etc.) because it is more convenient?

Frankly, I think the broadcasters should be welcoming Aereo for expanding their viewing audience.
cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:9
Actually, those numbers are less and less from "nielsen families" and more and more from DVR / STB data collection -- as the tuner, it knows exactly what you're watching and when. (And Tivo, Inc. has even gone so far as to analyze which superbowl commercials are popular, etc.)

But, broadcasters are just as much a bunch of greedy, self-serving asses as everyone else. They don't see Aereo as additional eyeballs; they see it as someone who isn't paying them money, even though their business is renting a tuner. (If they wanted to stop this, they can rent a building directly between their tower and Aereo's office to block the signal.)
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw
It doesn't really matter if your not a neilsen household. That being said I think the neilson technology has advanced and they can do separate ratings for people who watch live (and therefore watch the commercials) and people who DVR it (thus most likely watch it later and FF through commercials).

The advertisers pay for people watching their commercials, not for watching the TV show (unless your clever and pay for product placement within the TV show which forces people to notice your product).

I don't think Aereo actually helps out the TV channels. They aren't hooked up Neilsen boxes, which means they don't count in the ratings. Thus it doesn't increase ad revenue nor do they collect carriage fees. Hence why the channel owners want to shut it down.
ptbarnett

join:2002-09-30
Lewisville, TX

Re: Arrivaderci

said by zod5000:

I don't think Aereo actually helps out the TV channels. They aren't hooked up Neilsen boxes, which means they don't count in the ratings.

If Aereo isn't shutdown and their users become a significant percentage of viewers in broadcast TV markets, Nielsen will find a way to include them -- along with Netflix, Hulu, and all the other video streaming services.

For that matter, Aereo can provide a wealth of information about their users to advertisers: what shows were recorded, what shows were eventually watched, live TV vs. recorded, skipped commercials vs. viewing commercials (and even replaying commercials).

TiVo has already been doing this, for at least a decade:

»www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/02/0···vo.reut/
»www.traglobal.com/
thedragonmas

join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
kudos:1
said by zod5000:

It doesn't really matter if your not a neilsen household. That being said I think the neilson technology has advanced

not really, where a neilsen household, if you have a landline theyl send you a "box" you hook up to the phone line and every one in the house wears a "pager" (receiver listens to the tv). end of the day you put the "pager" on the charger, and via power line networking it transmits its collected data to the "box" and it then calls out via phone.

why is this relevant to your statement? simple, if your a cellphone only household you get the old fashioned paper journals.. the tech hasnt advanced, if it had that box could plug in to my router by now.. and i wouldnt have to keep explaining the paper journal thing to dad ::sigh :: maybe some day.

edit: about aereo id love if it was here, as a renter i cant just slap up an antenna, no matter what the FCC says, and ever since the digital transition you cant get a signal here with out an outdoor mast mount antenna system probably cheaper than basic cable, but not worth possibly getting kicked out over. (again, no matter what the fcc says, nothing stops a landloard from simply not renewing your lease after you install one, as is there right), so aereo would be great for those of us that rent. i dont know how much it costs, but it has to be less than the $30 + $2/per box im paying mediacom for BASIC cable tv. (no dvr's or anything, and thanks to there 100% encrypted system down here you cant use a vcr or dvd recorder, unless of course you set the box to that one channel, and get up to change its channel later.. ugh.)
ptbarnett

join:2002-09-30
Lewisville, TX

Re: Arrivaderci

Aereo is $8/month to watch/record 1 channel at a time, and $12/month for more DVR space and 2 channels at a time.

I don't know if you can even buy a VCR any longer, but my last one had a "cable mouse" -- an infrared transmitter that you could put in front of the cable box, and program the VCR to change the channel -- even on an all-digital system.
thedragonmas

join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
kudos:1

Re: Arrivaderci

said by ptbarnett:

Aereo is $8/month to watch/record 1 channel at a time, and $12/month for more DVR space and 2 channels at a time.

I don't know if you can even buy a VCR any longer, but my last one had a "cable mouse" -- an infrared transmitter that you could put in front of the cable box, and program the VCR to change the channel -- even on an all-digital system.

never seen one like that, ive still got an old RCA vcr, though its "retired" to just playing VHS movies i havent bothered to get DVD's for.. I switched to a DVD recorder years ago. it would depend on "vcr timers" on the cable box, odd thing about that is, if you rent the DVR from mediacom (about $20/mo for the first one when you account for the other associated fees to use it), but DONT pay for DVR service, the DVR option turns in to a "vcr timers" option button. but the DTA's ($2/mo) you would think theyd have "vcr timers" on the DTA's for this purpopse. thing is they want you to rent there DVR's..

soo, using my current hardware id need to manually change the channels (2am recordings any one?) or, buy new hardware i didnt need before they forced the all encrypted switch over. (thank you FCC for allowing this)

i really hope aereo wins the SCOTUS case..
cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:9
said by ptbarnett:

All the DVR did was make it more convenient.

Actually, DVR's just make it faster. I have an RCA VCR that does automatic commercial advance -- and no one EVER sued RCA over that technology. (which they licensed from someone else.)

jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI
The viewer they, and their advertisers, lose? Or do you suppose they produce those shows, pay all those people and run all that hardware just for fun?

Jim
megarock

join:2001-06-28
Catawissa, MO
Reviews:
·Charter

1 recommendation

Simple...if I cannot get my viewing the way I want it I will simply torrent the shows. Better anyway because all the commercials are already taken out. Screw the consumer and we screw back. WTF is wrong with Aereo anyway - it's the same thing most people get from an antenna but some have issues with signals since going to DTV.

Don't want my business fine. You won't get it.

tc1uscg

join:2005-03-09
Clinton Township, MI

Whats the difference?

Ok, so what IS the BIG DEAL with Aero. Seems to me, they are 'rebroadcasting' the same thing the cable companies are and what most of us can get off a digi antenna? Oh wait, I think it could be no revenue goes toward the likes of CBS, NBC, etc.. that they collect for the "service"? Whereas Comcrap charges a fee and they pay money to the before mentioned crybabies. It's more complicated than that I know but really people? It's not like they cut out the commercials or charge per channel. So, whoever this idiot judge is out west, it's clear where his investments come from. So, wonder how many apartments buildings violate this 1976 copyright act by putting antennas up on it's roof, providing it's renters a tv signal to a wall outlet for FREE (or a small fee)? Ok.. done with my morning rant.. Traffic is moving now..

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Whats the difference?

Its a DVR tech, commercials can be cut out (FF'd) as far as I know, and NO they dont pay a penny to the stations whereas the MSO's do. That is outrageously unfair to both the stations AND the MSO's. So that makes sense to you? Aereo should play by the same rules as anyone else.

Now, for a long time I thought Aereo had mini antennas at the user side connected to laptops and such. Let them go for THAT design, then it all makes sense, and nothing can be done about it.
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: Whats the difference?

I've got a DVR, and I watch commercials all the time. You can't skip commercials on Live TV, and can't always be bothered to hit a button unless the commercial is annoying.

A mini-antenna wouldn't work, people are buying Aereo partly because they have bad reception at their location. Aereo is providing good reception (primarily), and the ability to use a box like Roku.
TheMayor

join:2002-05-09

Re: Whats the difference?

How many live shows do you actually HAVE to watch live? In the past year, there probably has been only a handful of commercials I watched, thanks to automatic commercial skipping
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

Re: Whats the difference?

Yeah I've got an old DVR, it's got a 30 second skip button but not automatic. What DVR are you using, and do you use an antenna?
TheMayor

join:2002-05-09

Re: Whats the difference?

I'm using Windows Media Center, along with another program called Comskip. Comskip (used with another program called DvrMsToolbox) goes thru the show after it's done recording & creates another file where it believes a commercial is at.

When I go & play the show, it automatically skips over the commercial
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Re: Whats the difference?

I tried to set that up. What a complete mess. I'm using TiVo now, and with it's incredible remote and interface, I can button mash through commercials in no time at all.
TheMayor

join:2002-05-09

Re: Whats the difference?

How is it a complete mess? I haven't had any problems with it. I would prefer not having to spend $1600 on a DVR setup, when I can spend a lot less.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Re: Whats the difference?

MCE and TiVo are about the same price, although if you're going to have an HTPC anyways, then yes, MCE is a lot cheaper. However, all this is irrelevant. MCE's interface is horrible, it makes no sense, it's hard to use, there are no good remotes for it, and worst of all, it's unreliable, and even Windows itself has all sorts of issues reliably driving an HT setup, where TiVo just works.

Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:2
said by tc1uscg:

It's more complicated than that I know

No, it's actually exactly that simple. Cable companies charge to provide TV service. They want to continue doing so. Networks, even the OTA's, get paid by the Cable Companies. They want to continue doing so. Aero threatens that business model, and thus the two groups will move heaven an earth to shut them down.

What does seem strange is that a Federal judge would issue an injunction now, with the issue already scheduled for a SCOTUS hearing.

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Whats the difference?

and the people who run Aereo should have seen how simple it actually is. I would hope they have a patent of some kind, but if approved, the MSOs one way or another can replicate this technology and the stations get royally screwed?
They are retransmitting TV signals, a blatant disregard for the law. Once Aereo gets shut down, expect them to have their pants sued off into non-existence.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Whats the difference?

They are not retransmitting, no matter how many times you say that, it still does not make it true.

MSO's have a 1 to many setup. 1 antenna collects and sends the signal to thousands, tens of thousands even hundreds of thousands of people in their market. But first it is captured in their facilities, then it is manipulated (commercials are added per their rebroadcast agreement) and it is sent on.

Aereo does none of that. The signal is simply captured by THE USERS antenna they have leased and sent to the user as is. This is even more individualized than a building having a single antenna on the roof that serves ALL of their tenants.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: Whats the difference?

If it is not being retransmitted, then how exactly is it getting from OTA on to the internet?

Brian_M

join:2004-06-19
Manchester, GA

Re: Whats the difference?

HDhomerun. slingbox, etc... no different than me asking someone closer to OTA signals if I can put up an antenna attached to a slingbox and send it out over their internet. All of which is perfectly legal.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
By your theory here then the very process of a wavelength being captured by the antenna, sent to a digital converter on a tuner over a wire and then sent to the screen is just as illegal as taking the wavelength captured by the antenna, sending it to a digital converter to be sent over wires and so that it can be received and displayed onto the screen.

The good ol days you had the antenna enter your VCR so it could record. They then "retransmit" it to your TV from the antenna "out" port.

How about amplifiers? They are taking the signal, manipulating them and then "retransmitting" them. In some cases to many other outlets in the home.

How about tuners in a HTPC? They receive the signal and have the ability to "retransmit" the live signal through the network to another device.

Tivo Roamio, has 6 tuners and I can get Tivo Mini's to "retransmit" to those tuners across a network connection to other TV's. I can even get a streamer to use it wirelessly on mobile devices.

So please tell me how Aereo is different than a Tivo, HTPC, amplifier or even a basic antenna.

anon_anon

@comcastbusiness.net

Re: Whats the difference?

There is an important distinction. Aereo is a third party redistributing copyrighted content without the consent of the broadcasters. It's the same reason why it is legal to burn OTA broadcasts to a DVD for your own personal use, but it is illegal to sell them, give copies to your friends, or put them on the pirate bay.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Whats the difference?

No Aereo is not "redistributing" anything and your analogy is highly flawed.

I will take your extremely loose interpretation of "redistributing" and say that what Aereo is doing is absolutely no different then me going to Walmart and buying 1000 copies of every movie they have and then selling them to everyone that approaches me and wants them. In that case, as in Aereo's, I have legally obtained and legally "redistributed" the content. I have not, as Aereo is not, making copies nor is there any altering of the content that is being distributed. Hell, if I wanted I dont even have to sell them out right and can simply rent the movies for a fee, something Aereo is not doing at all.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
It's 1:1, so it's not retransmission. That's the definition of the law.
cahiatt
Premium
join:2001-03-21
Smyrna, GA
said by Camelot One:

What does seem strange is that a Federal judge would issue an injunction now, with the issue already scheduled for a SCOTUS hearing.

Am thinking someone just got paid to help set that precedent.

••••
jagged

join:2003-07-01
Boynton Beach, FL

1 recommendation

no

Aereo is renting you an antenna and a DVR. A real physical antenna connected to your Aereo account. Your cable company used to plug a single antenna at the head end unit and re-transmit to all customers. Now they get their local station feeds via fiber optic.

On Aereo you can stream trough a PC or a Roku or mobile device, but not on all at the same time. So even though I paid for 2 tuners we could watch on the Roku only, or on the PC only but not on both at the same time

Aereo is like having an over the air DVR hooked to a Slingbox

•••••••••••••••••

jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI
said by tc1uscg:

Oh wait, I think it could be no revenue goes toward the likes of CBS, NBC, etc.. that they collect for the "service"?

Precisely. The broadcasters have become addicted to retransmission fees. What they're going to do when cord cutting gets to the point that subscription TV companies (cable/satellite) say "Uhm... the viewership numbers aren't worth your fees" is anybody's guess.

Jim

•••
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
Yeah, I am wondering how the antenna thing works. I think there is some sort of legal provision for a "community shared antenna" or something like that, as long as it is free to all the tenants.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
A shared antenna for OTA reception is not a copyright violation, even if a fee is paid for the wire. This dates back to the 1950s.

For an outstanding review and breakdown of the legal issues, by a real live copyright lawyer, see here

••••••
mingkee27

join:2013-06-21
Brooklyn, NY

1 recommendation

consumers are the biggest losers

If you are in where no OTA, you have to pay mega bill to cable/satelite or NO TV AT ALL!

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

They had it coming

Call it piracy, call it stealing, call it whatever but they have no right to charge for retransmission of a signal without compensating the TV station owners.

At least this judge got it right. At least with a VCR, you own the VCR and the magnetic cassettes that go into them.

••••••••••••••••••••

anonomeX

@comcast.net

1 recommendation

Funny...

a real judge (not in some network's pocket) would have issued a continuance given the case on the SCOTUS docket. FUBAR
smcallah

join:2004-08-05
Home

Re: Funny...

Depends on what this case was about. The SCOTUS case is about whether they violate the 1976 Copyright law or not. If the other case was not based on that, a judge could issue a ruling.

jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

1 recommendation

Flaw In Judge Kimball's Reasoning

From pp. 12 of the injunction, relying on Judge Chin's reasoning in his Second Circuit dissent:

quote:
This court is also not persuaded by the Second Circuit’s subsequent application of its Cablevision decision to Aereo’s system...
...
...the subscribers in Cablevision already had the ability to view television programs in real-time through their authorized cable subscriptions...

(emphasis added)

How is that materially different from OTA "subscribers" in a given market already having the ability to view television programs through their own equipment, such "as an antenna, digital video recorder, and Slingbox"?

Jim
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5

Re: Flaw In Judge Kimball's Reasoning

This is answered in the next sentence. Judge Chin views the Aereo service as unauthorized viewing, thus the contrast with CableVision whose users were authorized to view the programs. You pulled the quote out of context.

pqzm

@129.253.54.x

1 recommendation

Think of it this way..

Is it legal for me to put up an antenna in my attic and receive the broadcast stations.....yes.

Now suppose I don't get good reception with the antenna in my attic and so I ask my neighbor if he would allow me to put my antenna on his property to get a better shot at receiving the signal and he says yes. Is it legal to run a wire from my house to my antenna on his property....yes.

Now suppose I up the ante and ask my neighbor if it is ok if I put my TIVO on his property so that it's closer to the antenna to get less signal loss. Is that legal...yes.

Now, is it legal for my neighbor to charge me rent for locating my antenna and TIVO on his property....yes.

Is it legal if my neighbor actually owns the antenna and TIVO, but rents it exclusively to me....yes.

Remember, no one else but me can use this antenna/TIVO combination.

Now, suppose my neighbor decides that the rest of the neighborhood would also like a setup like this and he puts up a whole slew of antennas and buys a TIVO for each and rents a separate antenna/TIVO combo to each household in the neighborhood? Is it legal....yes.

Aereo maintains a completely seperate antenna for each customer and they claim that they record a separate video stream for DVR purposes for each customer that has scheduled a recording. No two customers get the same antenna feed and no two customers get the same recorded DVR stream.

So, how is this illegal?

•••••

jreffner
Premium
join:2003-04-16
West Chester, OH

Alternative

There is a very good alternative for the cord cutters if you loose Aereo. It's called Simple.TV.

Basically, you connect your own antenna to it (the Simple.TV box) to get the free OTA signals. Then you plug in an ethernet cable which goes to your router or switch. This allows the signal to travel over your network. Then either watch TV on your iPad with the app, or on the computer via a browser, or for the best results, watch through a Roku to get it on your TV.

Plug a hard drive into it, and you can also DVR your shows for free!

If you want to schedule your recordings as say, "Channel 19 at 5:00", then there are no monthly charges. If you want a nice guide and easy programming such as, "Simpsons, new episodes and re-runs all season long", then there is either a small monthly charge (I think $5) or you can buy a lifetime subscription for $150. This subscription is transferable to each new hardware model you will upgrade to in the future.

So in short, if you have a Simple.TV, and a Roku and a USB HD, you pay nothing monthly for OTA TV. In return you get a nice DVR and the ability to watch TV almost anywhere.

Check it out, I love mine: www.simple.tv
elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

1 recommendation

Re: Alternative

Yes this is in conjunction w/ Silicondust. The only problem is that the antenna needs to get the signal, but the product itself is like where boxee was trying to go before they sold out to the man along w/ Sage....

If people PAID for a professional to install the antenna, this wouldn't be an issue. We have become accustomed to plug-and-play and IMHO in many cases for OTA that is not the case. Also in more dense areas, that may be an issue also.

I think it makes sense, however their monthly charge is a drag. You can just build your own for less, but not as easy as simple.

jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI
said by jreffner:

There is a very good alternative for the cord cutters if you loose Aereo. It's called Simple.TV.

Basically, you connect your own antenna to it ...

We don't use Aereo for the TV-over-IP aspect, but because, on bad hair days or heavy air traffic overhead, the weak OTA digital signals are disrupted, rending some channels unwatchable. We have little interest in watching TV on our tablets or smartphones.

Jim
tawmack

join:2012-12-03
Salt Lake City, UT

When?

When are they going to turn it off? Im in the SLC market and have been watching the olympics and other stuff via Aereo all day.
frank124c

join:2003-12-04
Brooklyn, NY

Aereo

The big corporations that own tv screwed the people when they "improved" tv. In the old days we got many channels, now I cannot get any channels even tho I live in Brooklyn NY and I did buy a converter box and an amplified indoor antenna. Aereo, Filmon and USTVnow just give the people back what was taken from them. Now many internet websites, such as Amazon for example, are coming out with their own tv shows to provide competition for broadcast tv and we can always go to YouTube and use bit torrent. So no matter what, we the people, can overcome the greedy pig corporations.