HBO Might Sue Slingbox

said by qdemn7:

Content owners think everyone is a thief. If you invite friends over to watch Subscription Anything, and THEY aren't paying for the service at their house they think that violates Copyright.

said by Kearnstd:

this is sadly true, rumor is bar owners cant say buy a PPV of a boxing match in the same way you could at home.

said by Kearnstd:

this is sadly true, rumor is bar owners cant say buy a PPV of a boxing match in the same way you could at home.

said by jebba2005:

Are bar owners charged per person or something ridiculous like that? I seem to remeber when Tyson was in his prime, this was the issue for all his ppv fights.

said by CSU:

I thought technology was supposed to make things easier and more efficient. All I ever read is how someone develops a new technology and someone else sues because of the new innovation.

said by CSU:

I thought technology was supposed to make things easier and more efficient. All I ever read is how someone develops a new technology and someone else sues because of the new innovation.

said by N10Cities:

AND possible competition.... Here is a quote from the last paragraphs of TFA....

"HBO's Zitter noted that Sling is not the only company doing time-shifting and place-shifting of video content.

Zitter says HBO has an exclusive mobile distribution deal with Cingular Wireless LLC and also distributes its content to cell phones in nine countries outside the U.S. "

Sounds like HBO doesn't want any competition in the place-shifting field and will litigate any competitors out of the market.

said by CSU:

I thought technology was supposed to make things easier and more efficient.

said by jjoshua:

HBO? Are they still around?

said by djrobx:

quote:

---

They can't compete there because current technology trumps captive programming

---

They can compete there, because they can offer uncensored shows. The Sopranos wouldn't really fly on network TV. Even shows like Six Feet Under which could technically work on network TV are just so much better with "natural" swearing and nudity instead of the stifled stuff we get on primteime networks.

said by apollo80:

As silly and far fetched as your joke is...it will only be a matter of time before thinking like this actually happens. Ah, the irony of truth...

said by moonpuppy:

The RIAA already gets royalties on blank music CDs.

said by Transmaster:

which you can avoid by purchasing CD that are for data. There is no difference except for the packaging which is another illustration of just how stupid these RIAA types think we are.

said by Techman21:

...greed.

This country has slipped into it so much that our laws aren't even for the people anymore. Many laws are passed for big business...what we need is reformation both in the legal system AND in government. We need to clean house and start anew...but I already know this will never happen...its seen in history...the wealthy gain power keep it then are overthrown by the upset masses....Rome fell, who says the US won't? Its part of the cycle of things. But by that time I'll be long dead.

said by mglunt:

I am surprised someone has not brought this up.

I could very easily set up a slingbox at my parents house in Pa to avoid having to pay for the NFL Sunday Ticket to see Steeler games.

said by rradina:

than subscribing to HBO in your home, recording a favorite show to DVD and taking that DVD and your laptop on your next out-of-town business trip?

I completely understand the rebroadcasting issue and that would be a violation of copyright. HBO has every right to ensure that their subscription content is only viewed by rightful subscribers. However, if Slingbox is being used by a valid HBO subscriber to view previously recorded content, time-shifted content or live content, where's the beef?

One could use Slingbox to send video to a laptop on the back porch or 1,000 miles away. Either way, if the subscriber is the viewer, they still get their money and seemingly nothing illegal is taking place.

The only negative I see is that some revenue could evaporate if such viewing becomes pervasive and causes hotel owners to cancel their contracts with content providers. I don't know how much revenue this represents. Regardless, to become this pervasive would likely take a generation where today's kids would grow up with the technology and then carry it with them everywhere. There are also bandwidth challenges although these limits should be eliminated in the coming years. (At least I hope most of us aren't still stuck with 256K upload for the next 30 years!)

said by dvd536:

Because HBO wants you to pay extra say if they offer HBO in your hotel room. just like MPAA wants you to pay for different formats of the same movie or RIAA with different forms of the same track of music.