dslreports logo
 story category
DOJ Backs Broadcasters In Aereo Supreme Court Fight
As Aereo's April 22 showdown with broadcasters at the Supreme Court looms, broadcasters got some significant if not unsurprising support in the form of the United States government. In a Supreme Court filing (pdf) made by the Justice Department, the agency states their opinion that Aereo's OTA technology still violates copyright, while arguing Aereo can be defeated without impacting the fate of other technologies, like Cablevision's cloud DVR. "A decision rejecting [Aereo’s] infringing business model and reversing the judgment below need not call into question the legitimacy of innovative technologies that allow consumers to use the Internet to store, hear, and view their own lawfully acquired copies of copyrighted works," the Justice Department said.
view:
topics flat nest 

tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Gulfport, MS

tc1uscg

Member

Lobby away.. lobby away

In other news... congressional leaders have seen a large influx of donations from the big 3 broadcast companies.. next the weather.

jseymour
join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

jseymour

Member

Re: Lobby away.. lobby away

This has nothing to do with Congress. The Justice (for me, but not for thee) Department is part of the Executive Branch, which is Barack Obama's bailiwick. Hollyweird and the broadcast industry have both pretty consistently supported the Pretender, so it's no surprise his "justice" department would sing their tune.

Jim

PlusOne
@comcast.net

PlusOne

Anon

Re: Lobby away.. lobby away

said by jseymour:

This has nothing to do with Congress. The Justice (for me, but not for thee) Department is part of the Executive Branch, which is Barack Obama's bailiwick. Hollyweird and the broadcast industry have both pretty consistently supported the Pretender, so it's no surprise his "justice" department would sing their tune.

Jim

+1
Rakeesh
join:2011-10-30
Phoenix, AZ

Rakeesh

Member

Re: Lobby away.. lobby away

+2

That, and Eric Holder is perhaps the most corrupt and incompetent attorney general to have ever held that position. Everything bad anybody has ever said about Reno (shudder,) Ashcroft, and Gonzales...those guys have nothing on Holder.
Automate
join:2001-06-26
Atlanta, GA

Automate

Member

Re: Lobby away.. lobby away

+1

wizardry
@ohio-state.edu

wizardry to jseymour

Anon

to jseymour
Exactly. The Comcast/NBC deal was helped by the fact that certain NBC executives are big campaign donors.
biochemistry
Premium Member
join:2003-05-09
92361

biochemistry to jseymour

Premium Member

to jseymour
But but... hope... and change.

tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Gulfport, MS

tc1uscg to jseymour

Member

to jseymour
So, you REALLY think those f-tards in congress didn't have anything to do with "suggesting" this action. I need to stop watching CSPAN
Automate
join:2001-06-26
Atlanta, GA

Automate

Member

Re: Lobby away.. lobby away

And you think Obama does what congress wants?
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd

Premium Member

Re: Lobby away.. lobby away

said by Automate:

And you think Obama does what congress wants?

Congress cannot even do what congress wants. The current fighting between the Dems and the Teatards that run the GOP means nobody in our government gets a damn thing done that benefits the people.

ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Danbury, CT

ieolus to jseymour

Member

to jseymour
The Pretender?

Damn that was a great show.

goalieskates
Premium Member
join:2004-09-12
land of big

goalieskates

Premium Member

Uh huh.

quote:
while arguing Aereo can be defeated without impacting the fate of other technologies
The current DOJ is so politicized and consistently wrong, I'd take their opinion with a huge grain of salt.
ptb42
join:2002-09-30
USA

1 recommendation

ptb42

Member

Re: Uh huh.

said by goalieskates:

The current DOJ is so politicized and consistently wrong, I'd take their opinion with a huge grain of salt.

Yeah, this is the DoJ that claims that only certain groups of people can be victimized by hate crimes (and therefore, only certain groups of people can commit hate crimes).

PlusOne
@comcast.net

PlusOne

Anon

Re: Uh huh.

said by ptb42:

said by goalieskates:

The current DOJ is so politicized and consistently wrong, I'd take their opinion with a huge grain of salt.

Yeah, this is the DoJ that claims that only certain groups of people can be victimized by hate crimes (and therefore, only certain groups of people can commit hate crimes).

+1
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

nasadude to goalieskates

Member

to goalieskates
you forgot corrupt

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

SimbaSeven to goalieskates

Member

to goalieskates
said by goalieskates:

I'd take their opinion with a huge grain of salt.

+1.. A grain of salt? Don't you mean a boulder of salt?

Kilroy
MVM
join:2002-11-21
Saint Paul, MN

1 recommendation

Kilroy

MVM

Let's continue to prop up outdated business models

Further proof we have the best government that money can buy. There is still hope that Aereo could prevail, but this does not bode well.
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

Crookshanks

Member

Wow

And here I thought Uncle Sam would happily drive a stake into OTA's heart, given the FCC's obsession with reclaiming that spectrum for more mobile broadband.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

1 recommendation

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

When an individual wants to outsource their antenna .....

it's copyright infringement.

When a corporation wants to outsource anything, it's sound business practice.

If corporations are people too, then the corollary must also be true .....people can be corporations as well (and never serve jail time).
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: When an individual wants to outsource their antenna .....

said by MaynardKrebs:

people can be corporations as well

I know it's not necessarily what you were implying, but you can establish a legal business entity to limit liability for business activities anytime you'd like. There are several options available.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

Re: When an individual wants to outsource their antenna .....

Who'd of thunk... liability can vanish into thin air with the simple act of incorporation!
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: When an individual wants to outsource their antenna .....

No, it doesn't vanish, nor is that what I said. But then you know that already.

n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

n2jtx

Member

Lobbyists At Work

It looks like this DOJ filing was bought and paid for by the OTA industry. Aereo is complying with every technical aspect of the current law and DOJ claims they are breaking the law. Meanwhile other services that follow that same law and technical requirements ARE NOT breaking the law. Go figure that one out.

As I have said before, the simple solution is for the content providers to go to congress, drop a couple of hundred million on them and buy a change in the law.
shmerl
join:2013-10-21

shmerl

Member

So, how much

was DOJ paid for this exactly?
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd

Premium Member

Re: So, how much

Unknown but clearly some people in the right places just secured their high paying positions on Lobby Row in DC when they retire from the DOJ.
firedrakes
join:2009-01-29
Arcadia, FL

firedrakes

Member

Re: So, how much

"Money (That's What I Want)"
"Money (That's What I Want)"
"Money (That's What I Want)"
"Money (That's What I Want)"
DOJ

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

KrK

Premium Member

US Government Backs $$$$

Surprise!

Best Government money can buy (Off)

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Hello retransmission fees

Aero will have to probably pay retransmission fees and then raise their rates to those similar of a cable/satellite subscription.

It's not that broadcasters are against over the top technologies, it's those that push the technologies want retransmission contracts that would allow them to charge a fraction of the rates of traditional cable/satellite subscriptions. The average cable bill is about $70 a month, the streaming providers want to charge $12 a month for the same content. That's the sticking point and that is why over the top technologies are going nowhere. You can't charge $12 a month for content that costs you $50 per month to obtain. ESPN costs $5 per subscriber alone.

In the business world, if you pay the gatekeeper what they demand then you are allowed in. They'll gladly take the money of the streaming providers, the streaming providers will have to charge rates similar to a cable subscription and use some form of content protection.

dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI

dnoyeB

Member

Re: Hello retransmission fees

I was under the impression that Cable was more than just a retransmitter. More like a local TV station that injected its own commercials? Is this not so?

Either way, cable has much more content than OTA so that may have a bit to do with the price difference.

TOPDAWG
Premium Member
join:2005-04-27
Calgary, AB

1 recommendation

TOPDAWG to IowaCowboy

Premium Member

to IowaCowboy
and ESPN is why I find cable to be BS. damn if I care about paying for that crap as I don't watch sports at all. BS I have to pay for crap I don't want but mind you I don't have cable so I don't have to pay.

anon troll
@bellsouth.net

anon troll to IowaCowboy

Anon

to IowaCowboy
Yes, but Youtube, Ustream, and Dailymotion would also have to pay retransmission fees as well. Users would have to pay a fee to keep their accounts on Youtube, Ustream and dailymotion open or their accounts will be terminated.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

Their filing is rather comical

The Aereo business model (and the previous court decisions) rest firmly on the ground set by Cablevision's remote DVR service NOT being a 'public performance'. Since it is the user that is in control of the broadcast to themselves (in both cases) the performance is deemed private instead of public. The brief clearly states this then goes to say that the Aereo decision should be reversed but there is no reason to revisit the Cablevision decision since they are an innovative business. There is no legal precedent or justification to describe how the services differ... just that we don't have to bother Cablevision while we squash infringing Aereo. They argue that watching a recording (ala Cablevision) is completely different than watching live TV (even though they admit there is a 5-6 second buffer!) What little legal argument they actually put forward relies on the opinion of the dissenting judge in the Cablevision case. In essence, they DO argue that Cablevision's DVR service is infringing but we only need to consider that against Aereo. :/ If this was my lawyer I would fire him instantly.