<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Re: TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able&#x27; in forum &#x27;&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25657597</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 01:48:00 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 01:48:00 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25663641</link>
<description><![CDATA[PDXPLT posted : <div class="bquote"><said>said by <a href="/profile/454515" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=454515');">banditws6</a>:</said><p>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.<br> </p></div>Yea, but that's not how "hollywood" thinks. As an insider once explained to me, it consists of 2 parts. One part create some content. The other part is an army of lawyers and take-no-prisoners business types, whose jobs are to extract every piece of value (i.e., revenue) that they possibility can from that content. What you're seeing here is that second part in action; "maybe we can get paid an incremental fee because the viewer is holding the screen in their hand, rather than looking at one hanging on a wall".]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25663641</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 27 Mar 2011 14:44:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25658797</link>
<description><![CDATA[Kearnstd posted : <div class="bquote"><said>said by <a href="/profile/454515" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=454515');">banditws6</a>:</said><p>This is what I was thinking. Time Warner only lets you watch TV content via their iPad app if:<br><br>1. You are a Time Warner cable subscriber who already has access to the same content via your cable package<br>2. You are using it at home on your Time Warner Internet service<br><br>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.<br> </p></div>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.<br><small>--<br>[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25658797</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 23:22:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25657688</link>
<description><![CDATA[banditws6 posted : This is what I was thinking. Time Warner only lets you watch TV content via their iPad app if:<br><br>1. You are a Time Warner cable subscriber who already has access to the same content via your cable package<br>2. You are using it at home on your Time Warner Internet service<br><br>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.<br><small>--<br>"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25657688</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 17:40:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>TWC built-in restrictions SHOULD not be sue-able</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25657597</link>
<description><![CDATA[Linklist posted : 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.<br><small>--<br>Record your speedtest.net results in DSLReports SpeedWave <br>&raquo;<a rel=nofollow HREF="http://www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88" >www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88</A></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/TWC-builtin-restrictions-SHOULD-not-be-sueable-25657597</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 17:16:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
