Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo → Surprised?

Did anyone really think a bunch of old people would have enough insight into modern technology to vote any other way?

You're being very ageist. I think they understood the issues legally

That average age of the Supreme Court is lower than the average age of the Rolling Stones.

All I am saying is that until younger tech savvy people take the bench and congress, we will continue to have rulings like this and 95 years on copyright which is unconstitutional to any reasonable person.

I don't think being "old and technically out of touch" had that much to do with it. It seems the majority felt what Aereo is doing is wrong. In my opinion Breyer legislated from the bench and made a big mess with the "looks like cable, it must be cable" methodology. They recognized the technical differences but dismissed them because of the old "we'll do what's right" crap. Even though in Scalia's dissent he agreed Aereo shouldn't be allowed to do this, he wasn't convinced copyright law clearly prevents it. He went on to suggest it could be a loophole and that Congress should close it if they so desire.

The courts job isn't necessarily to do what's right. Too often the "right" thing is subjective ideology. The court should rule based on principled methodologies. If the law isn't clear, they shouldn't invent new meaning with "looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it must be a duck" volition because they think it's the "right" thing to do.

Courts interpret laws. You rightfully call out Congress for its ineptitude, but I don't see how the SCOTUS failed.