On Monday we noted that Fox network founder Barry Diller and his new disruptive Internet video service Aereo were looking forward to their fight with broadcasters. Aereo has now hired David Hosp, a copyright attorney who helped Cablevision when they were sued for their network DVR idea -- a fight Cablevision won when the Supreme Court refused to hear the case back in 2009. Cablevision was sued for their service after the broadcast industry became terrified the project would disrupt legacy TV revenues while eroding their market power. Aereo plans to launch its broadcast TV platform on Wednesday in the New York market despite the lawsuit. Those interested can sign up for an invite here (new users get 90 days free) and we'll happily post any user impressions of the new service.
how? they're not reselling the services. Which makes Karl wrong when he claims they're trying to disrupt TV. They're not trying to do that. Just giving you an option to get OTA online in areas where you can NOT pick up OTA regularly.
What you are paying for is the DVR and the antenna NOTHING more.
2012-Mar-14 4:25 pm: ·
swintec Premium,VIP join:2003-12-19 Alfred, ME kudos:6
Presuming you live in Alfred, ME, I think you're a little out of their service area of NYC. Their service is a legal gray area inside the NYC DMA. Outside, it's definitely illegal.
Yea true. I read it as they only have NYC channels for now but people anywhere with invites could sign up. By the looks of it you can't watch out of market streams then? -- Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts
That's the plan. Whatever area in which your address is located, that's the area you can get service for (when such service is available). Other areas are currently planned for service (but we'll see if that happens).
2012-Mar-14 6:09 pm: ·
cdru Go Colts Premium,MVM join:2003-05-14 Fort Wayne, IN kudos:7
and I dont know if this will have an affect or not but Cablevision already had a retransmission contract in place.
Thus the network DVR did nothing more than delay that retransmission at the consumers request just as a DVR sitting in their living room would do or a whole house DVR solution like UVerse. I dont know if this was even an argument of theirs or a factor in their winning.
Aereo on the other hand is saying they do not retransmit anything. They simply give the "house" an antennea and they receive the signal from it. Which I do agree with and would compare this to me being in a valley somewhere and not able to get signal so I run a line a few miles up a hill and pay a neighbor to allow me to put my antennae in his yard that gets signal. Is he profiting? Maybe, but he certainly is not retransmitting to me and thus violating their rights. I say maybe because he has given up some of his "real estate" and there is a cost to that.
Question is, would that same neighbor be in violation if he is 10FT away from my home or 1000 miles?
If there's "no limitation to the length of your cord" then shouldn't this system permit out-of-market network locals?
That can viewed as the only a grey area in this entire endeavor so they are limiting by billing address to ensure your residence is in the OTA signal area.
Technically you are right that the no limit on the length of the cord means you can put your antenna in the OTA area and extend your cord anywhere, but it looks like they want to stay away from that argument and win the battles they know they can 100%.
totally agree! And that is how cable started! One massive headend picking up locals and then putting them into homes. And regardless of where the antenna is- Aero isn't really profiting; they're charging for housing the antenna.
If one were to take this single dime sized antenna and the receiver it is attached to out of Aereo's facility into the average home chances are it would completely fail to work. There is no such thing as an effective dime sized antenna at the frequencies broadcast television uses, let alone one that will reliably capture all the channels in a particular broadcast market in a single location.
During the discovery process of the lawsuit the premises will be searched and it could be determined that each tiny antenna is actually receiving a signal coupled from a larger receiving antenna that Aereo has put up, or the array of small antennas is arranged in a way that makes them collectively act as larger antenna.