If you weren't following, Aereo was that little antenna that picked up digital TV signals and connected to your computer/phone. The Supreme Court has decided that it's illegal because reasons.
http://www.onthemedia.org/story/supreme ... nst-aereo/Quote:
Broadcasters argued that Aereo made it harder for broadcasters to negotiate "retransmission fees" with cable companies and made their advertising less valuable.
Writing for the majority, Justice Breyer agreed, writing in the decision " "The statute makes clear that the fact that Aereo’s subscribers may receive the same programs at different times and locations is of no consequence. Aereo transmits a performance of petitioners’ works 'to the public.'"
In his dissent, Scalia argues that the real problem is not public performance but live performance. He says that Aereo might be able to remain open if it "time-shifts" its broadcasts, meaning it doesn't show them live. It's unclear whether the rest of the court agrees with him.
Obviously, this is going to be seen as a big setback for the cord-cutting movement. The biggest problem with Aereo would appear to be that you're paying for free over-the-air signals, in other words, Aereo is acting as a cable company -- albeit highly limited -- that doesn't pay its stations for retransmissions. You don't buy an Aereo antenna/receiver, you just rent one.
Unsurprisingly, the NFL was a big player in getting these guys shut down, what with the majority of its telecasts being over the air and this being a threat to their revenue chain: if people don't pay their cable providers (well, provid
er once TimeWarnerComcast happens), who pays NBC/Fox/CBS, who pays the NFL, well, you see. Interesting that the court's "liberals" came down on the side of Big Daddy Comcast, if by interesting I mean totally predictable, which I do.
_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
