dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
158

Frank
Premium Member
join:2000-11-03
somewhere

1 recommendation

Frank

Premium Member

no loopholes?

ok, hear me out.

slingboxes are legal right?

couldnt they just sell you the micro dvr and micro antenna and then charge you for colocation instead of charging you for a service? to get around all of this legal nonsense? you could even add a clause that requires customers to sellback the equipment at the end of the term.

cant be considered public rebroadcasting if the owner of the antenna is the one watching the broadcast right?
Chuck_IV
join:2003-11-18
Connecticut

Chuck_IV

Member

Based on this ruling, it wouldn't surprise me to see another round of revised lawsuits againts things like Slingbox very soon.

maartena
Elmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA

1 recommendation

maartena to Frank

Premium Member

to Frank
The core of this ruling is that they don't pay the broadcasters for the content/signal like a cable company does, but they ARE re-distributing the signal anyways. They got around it with their "rent-a-tenna" idea, but in the end it is the same: The company who picks up the signal (AEREO in this case) is not paying the broadcaster for re-distribution.

The difference with a slingbox is that you (usually) connect it to a cable or satellite service you already paid for, and in turn, that sat company has already paid for re-distribution of the signal. It's a place-shifting that you YOURSELF are doing, for media YOU have already paid for. The ruling here is that AEREO is trying to circumvent the laws and FCC rules that are currently in place by finding loopholes such as the "rent-a-tenna" idea.

I see what you are saying, one could have a "slingbox hosting service" that would connect your private slingbox to an antenna somewhere else, but that is quite a bit different then using the slingbox at home for personal use.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina

Member

How is it different?

birdfeedr
MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI

birdfeedr

MVM

said by rradina:

How is it different?

Time-shifting (ala VCR or DVR) is permitted for personal use. Place-shifting (ala Slingbox etc.) is permitted for personal use.

How is it diiferent? One is commercial use, the other is personal use. Sling Media permits personal use, prohibits commercial use in their terms of service.

Aereo is definitely commerce. So too would be a company in business to rent slingbox connected to an antenna.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina

Member

But is that Sling that prevents folks from renting their equipment and "system" or the FCC? The case isn't about Sling, I just used that as an example of what someone could do and didn't understand that if they can do it with their own equipment and pay for colo, why can't Aereo create a system that we can rent so we don't have to go through all that trouble. Plus colo fees for a Sling box would be considerably more than what Aereo was charging due to economy of scale.

PaulHikeS2
join:2003-03-06
Fitchburg, MA

PaulHikeS2

Member

said by rradina:

But is that Sling that prevents folks from renting their equipment and "system" or the FCC? The case isn't about Sling, I just used that as an example of what someone could do and didn't understand that if they can do it with their own equipment and pay for colo, why can't Aereo create a system that we can rent so we don't have to go through all that trouble. Plus colo fees for a Sling box would be considerably more than what Aereo was charging due to economy of scale.

You may have something here. A potential problem is that there is no single antenna per customer. They use an oversubscription model with the knowledge that they can deploy say 200 antennas to sell to say 1000 users.

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207 to maartena

Premium Member

to maartena
What if you use a Slingbox connected to an antenna? I'm not paying for FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, Univision, and anything else I can pick up with the antenna.

Aereo is essentially the exact same product, but they are allowing you to rent the equipment and the space it is located in; while I pay a one-time fee for the equipment with Slingbox and then either rent or own the space where I set it up.

It seems exactly the same to me.
jmn1207

jmn1207 to PaulHikeS2

Premium Member

to PaulHikeS2
Aereo uses a single antenna per channel stream. A customer might be able to lease more than one antenna from Aereo, but the antenna array was still only one per stream, not 1 antenna for 5 streams.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK to birdfeedr

Premium Member

to birdfeedr
No, it was still for personal use, using an OTA antenna.

chip89
Premium Member
join:2012-07-05
Columbia Station, OH

chip89 to Frank

Premium Member

to Frank
Slingbox is illegal as of NOW!

maartena
Elmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA

maartena to rradina

Premium Member

to rradina
said by rradina:

But is that Sling that prevents folks from renting their equipment and "system" or the FCC?

Sling Media sets that in their TOS. And rightly so, because if they did not, and some company buys 200 Slingboxes, puts them all in a room with a big antenna, and starts selling subscriptions to OTA television, they would be doing the same as AEREO and getting sued.

Sling Media had the smarter approach: You can use it for personal use, in case you want to move the television received in your home (for which, in case of cable and satellite YOU already pay for, and in turn the cable company pays for to the networks) to another location.
maartena

maartena to chip89

Premium Member

to chip89
said by chip89:

Slingbox is illegal as of NOW!

No it is not. Slingbox is not allowed for commercial use, and personal place-shifting is allowed. it would be wise to actually read the ruling, and understand the TOS from Sling Media.

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207 to maartena

Premium Member

to maartena
said by maartena:

Sling Media had the smarter approach: You can use it for personal use, in case you want to move the television received in your home (for which, in case of cable and satellite YOU already pay for, and in turn the cable company pays for to the networks) to another location.

Slingbox also works perfectly fine streaming HD content received OTA for free. If Slingbox equipment could be rented, then it would fall under the same decision from the SC. It's all for personal use, but with Slingbox, I purchase the equipment up front and I own it. With Aereo, you rent the equipment to use.
alphaz18
join:2005-02-26
CANADA

alphaz18 to Frank

Member

to Frank
i'd say the OP would be half correct.
I'd probably say its legal to sell rackspace. with a coax to an antenna. if the client will buy a slingbox and put it in there and have internet to upload stuff and set up your own gear. that should be legal and would be with the spirit of personal usage. HOWEVER, if the company provided the antenna provided the slingbox(leased or temporarily bought or whatever else) and the internet and set it all up for them "en mass" for general public, that's literally just twisting the words of the law to get around paying transmission fees. YES by the letter of the law it maybe legal but its definatelly against the spirit of the law and is whats known as a loophole, and lawmakers have the right to close loopholes.. (they should close a lot of loop holes that benefit large corporations too) but that's a whole different argument that ya not here.

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207

Premium Member

Again, if we want to punish for breaking the spirit of the law, and not strictly the letter of the law, than most politicians should be guilty of corruption and most lobbyists should be guilty of bribery. Afterall, they are just gaming the system and using loopholes to bypass the intent of the laws.

Same should apply for anyone looking to restructure their finances to decrease their tax liability. Perhaps they should be charged with tax fraud, if only in spirit?
alphaz18
join:2005-02-26
CANADA

1 recommendation

alphaz18

Member

I absolutely agree with that. but that's not the issue at hand. 2 wrongs don't make a right...

But i'm all for aereo selling rackspace and basically colo. and you putting your own stuff in there.

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207

Premium Member

Yes, I'm just trying to point out the hypocrisy of it all and how the powerful and wealthy have a separate legal system than the rest of us.
alphaz18
join:2005-02-26
CANADA

alphaz18

Member

no debate from me there.. the whole legal system in the USA is completely borked... so is the copyright system.

maartena
Elmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA

maartena to jmn1207

Premium Member

to jmn1207
said by jmn1207:

Yes, I'm just trying to point out the hypocrisy of it all and how the powerful and wealthy have a separate legal system than the rest of us.

There is plenty wrong with the legal system. But in this case, they did get it right, did not vote along party lines, and interpreted the laws and regulations as they currently exist, and I can't fault the SCOTUS for their ruling on this. It is legit and correct.

And indeed: Just because the SCOTUS has made shady rulings in the past, doesn't mean they need to rule shady again when they got something right for a change.