dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Cablevision Backs Broadcaster Effort to Crush Aereo
Despite Having Been in Same Boat Recently
by Karl Bode 06:14PM Tuesday Sep 25 2012
Cablevision has thrown its support behind broadcast efforts to have disruptive TV streaming operation Aereo shut down, insisting in an amicus brief filed last week that Aereo's service violates copyright laws. Fox network founder Barry Diller started Aereo trials earlier this year, the service offering users a $12 a month option for local broadcast television services -- adding an interesting and inexpensive option for those eager to cut the cord. Cablevision's position is -- amusing -- given the fact that Cablevision had to fight these very same broadcasters for years in order to launch a network DVR the broadcast industry insisted violated copyright. In fact, a Judge last July denied attempts to immediately shut down Aereo based on the precedent set by Cablevision's victory.

view:
topics flat nest 

FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

1 recommendation

Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

Businesses make decisions one-by-one on what is best for their business and not based on some idea of what is fair in general.
--
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/

JasonOD

@comcast.net

Re: Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

said by FFH:

.... and not based on some idea of what is fair in general.

Who say's this is fair, anyone can see aereo is breaking existing copyright laws.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

no they're not. By your comment by using a SlingBox you are breaking the law. Because you do NOT pay to rebroadcast those same signals. Aero does NOT sell you the channels, they sell you a network DVR.

JasonOD

@comcast.net

Re: Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

Slingbox is a different matter and had their case settled. Aereo's business model rely's solely on the distribution copyrighted content.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

but they do NOT resell the service, that's the thing. They provide and bill ONLY for the DVR service, NOT the TV content.

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

1 recommendation

Re: Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

Wow dude, whats it like to live in the Twilight Zone?

cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7

1 recommendation

said by JasonOD :

Who say's this is fair, anyone can see aereo is breaking existing copyright laws.

The fact that the judge denied a preliminary injunction would seem to indicate that not everyone can see that copyright laws are being broken. Maybe the judge and/or jury will find against them eventually. But it's not an open and shut case.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

Re: Cablevision is a business & not a philosophy

that or in the eyes of the law they are not violating copyrights and that is how the judge saw it. Or they just happened to get a judge not bribed off by old business models.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
big_e

join:2011-03-05

1 recommendation

There is an obvious difference.

Cablevision already had paid for the rights redistribute the broadcasters signals in accordance with FCC regulations. Aereo hasn't paid the broadcasters anything and does not intend to.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: There is an obvious difference.

Aero does NOT resell the content. The only thing they sell is the network DVR. Similar to SlingBox that also had the same problem.
big_e

join:2011-03-05
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Frontier Communi..

Re: There is an obvious difference.

Whether or not they are acting as a reseller is whole basis of the lawsuit. In the end, they will be found as an unauthorized re distributor of content belonging to the television stations. Aereo's argument is that each subscriber is leasing an antenna. However if you read the patents on the technology you are going to find that no subscriber is assigned any particular antenna. Instead they are trunked and shared with multiple subscribers. This arrangement is not the scenario of renting rack space for a private slingbox. What Aereo is doing would be like somebody leasing access to one slingbox to multiple parties for profit, but only allowing one person to use it at a time. Its the exact same thing as Zediva, and Zediva lost.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
Isn't slingbox owned by dish though?

cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7

Re: There is an obvious difference.

said by me1212:

Isn't slingbox owned by dish though?

Slingbox and Dish are owned by the same parent company, Echostar.

I can see where you are likely going with this and in Slingbox's case, it would only apply to Dish subscribers that have the integrated slingbox functionality. The standalone devices would be in a similar category as Aereo in not having a retransmission license.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
additionally a sling box cannot be governed by retransmission laws because its a private use device. Location shifting is really no different than time shifting.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

Eddy120876

join:2009-02-16
Bronx, NY

1 recommendation

Aaah Cablevision .....Always trying to crush the little guy

No matter who the little guy is Cablevision will be there to crush you.gotta love then
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:1

Who really came up with and runs Aereo?

Who really came up with and runs Aereo?
Aereo Founder and CEO Chet Kanojia or Barry Diller?
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:1

Technical flaws in Aereo's operation.

What confuses me is exactly how the DVR portion works to support the idea that they do not have to pay for the content. The individual antenna argument makes little sense if the DVR for each subscriber is not an individual physical hard drive that a particular subscriber controls exclusively. Any shared HDD is going to create legal problems for Aereo. If 1 million subscribers sign up, Aereo is going to need to support at least 1 million individual HDDs. To facilitate data security from HDD failure, that means at least 1 spare HDD for every HDD subscribed to. For 1 million subscribers Aereo is going to need to support 2 million HDDs at minimum. That is a lot of capital and operating cost. I do not see how this venture is going to be profitable with those types of expenditures.

Tomek
Premium
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY

Re: Technical flaws in Aereo's operation.

They do not have to be physical hard drives, can be virtual, as long as they are not shared
--
Semper Fi
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:1

Re: Technical flaws in Aereo's operation.

The possible problem I see is how strictly would the courts rule on the individual having total control over the DVR. My understanding of HDDs is that only one write or read action can take place on the magnetic surfaces at any particular moment in time. If two subscribers are sending write commands to the same HDD at the same time, one of those commands is going to be delayed. Yes, the delay may be only 0.00001 second long, but for that period of time one user does not have total control over what the HDD is doing. Now, I may not be understanding how multi disk/platter large capacity drives work, but that is the way it was explained to me years ago. No two commands could ever be done at the exact same time. Something had to go to the HDD buffer and wait. The wait may be extremely short, but there was a delay.

What does individual subscriber total control of the DVR mean when execution delays in accessing virtual drives are measured in such small amounts of time? In the absolute technical sense they are not getting that total control advertised, so the Aereo experience is not like having a DVR at your house, where one subscriber's read/write commands are the only ones carried out. That is the problem I see potentially occurring. If Aereo is using virtual drives that work the way I think they do, the broadcasters' lawyers would be negligent in not bringing it up to show how it is not exactly like a normal DVR from DirecTV or a regular cable television company.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

evolve stupids...

the business model for "Broadcast Basic" as a service is over.. consumers will stream that AND MORE for free over the internet.. short of breaking what the internet does and QOS you will not stop consumers from doing this and avoid paying you $XX a month in addition to a set-top rental and franchise fees..

cable companies are actually LUCKY they still have video subscription customer base left.. 2013 is likely to be the year that SMART connected HDTVS make a run at being mainstream bought by consumers. cablevision needs to evolve and embrace streaming at a reasonable pricetag instead of trying to sue everyone or they will end up having to compete with free..