Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cloud Government Media Television The Courts Your Rights Online

Feds Now Oppose Aereo, Rejecting Cloud Apocalypse Argument 140

Posted by Soulskill
from the maybe-cut-back-on-the-hyperbole-next-time dept.
v3rgEz writes "TV streaming service Aereo expected broadcasters would put up a fight. The startup may not have seen the Justice Department as a threat, however. The Justice Department has now weighed in, saying in a filing that it's siding with major broadcasters who accuse Aereo of stealing TV content. In its filing, the Justice Department noted it doesn't believe a win for broadcasters would dismantle the precedent that created the cloud computing industry, as Aereo has previously claimed. The case is expected to go before the Supreme Court in late April."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Feds Now Oppose Aereo, Rejecting Cloud Apocalypse Argument

Comments Filter:
  • In other news.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:31PM (#46402857)

    The same Justice Department officials will soon leave to work for the various broadcast networks.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:32PM (#46402867)

    Thank goodness we've got the Obama administration to bring some common sense back to government and stand up for the little guy.

  • Re:In other news.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Desler (1608317) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:36PM (#46402887)

    Many of them are already industry lawyers to begin with.

    http://www.wired.com/threatlev... [wired.com]

  • by ackthpt (218170) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:38PM (#46402915) Homepage Journal

    As I have watched about 1 hour of TV over the past 10 years, I'm non-plussed. I have always felt the broadcasters were allowed to run roughshod over the public, with plenty of help from the federal government. It's a new century, can we start looking beyond 20th century business models, yet?

  • by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:48PM (#46403033)

    80 year old WHAT?

    what could any 80 year old law possibly have to do with modern nuances of virtual, cloud, broadcast (in modern times), store-and-forward, proxy, repeat, bridge and route?

    those didn't exist at all (in any real sense) 80 yrs ago.

    besides, you can't have it both ways: copyright was supposed to expire in a 'normal' period of time, but we kept changing things as things were about to expire, so that public property would not be public YET. if the government won't respect its own laws, why should we?

    anyway, copyright is not the same thing it once was, and broadcasting over the air is a trade: you get to use airwaves and you get funding from (lots of places). you have been funded and you chose to transmit data in the clear. what happens after that is NOT your business. it stopped being 'yours' once it hit the public non-encrypted airwaves.

  • by unitron (5733) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:49PM (#46403045) Homepage Journal

    Aereo is a public performance of copyrighted material. You cannot do that. You will get slapped.

    A public performance?

    You have every right to receive, for free, at no additional cost, any broadcast TV signal your antenna can bring in, and to record it on a DVR, and to have the DVR send it to the TV via Ethernet if you want to.

    This is just subcontracting the antenna, DVR, and Ethernet part out to someone else.

  • by almitydave (2452422) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @07:51PM (#46403067)

    .... many networks will stream a good portion of the shows that they air, usually only a day or so after initial broadcast... and typically leave them available for about a week. There's commercials, of course, but it's really not that bad a way to watch television. I'm not sure what need Aero was really trying to fill.

    Probably the needs of those for whom those qualifiers are problematic.

  • by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @09:11PM (#46403901) Journal

    Working at the shop I talk to a LOT of college aged kids, know what I've found? Frankly TV is The Lawrence Welk Show, something old folks liked that the kids honestly don't understand and don't want. They are used to having the net and "shows by appointment" is just something they really "don't get" and if they can't watch a show on THEIR schedule? Then they just don't care, they really don't.

    Honestly the only young folks I found with TVs were the really poor, those without net use TV as a form of cheap entertainment. Even my fiance who swore "I'm not gonna be able to stand going without TV" when she moved in has been TV free for almost a year and the USB cap card I gave her for her lappy sits unused. Once I showed her the wealth of instant entertainment? She never went back.

    So the broadcasters can bribe the government all they want, like the *.A.A they can't change the fact that their model has gone the way of the 8-track. The future is crowd funding and instant gratification, the days of "tune in, same bat time, same bat channel" as as dated as Adam West's Batman.

  • by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @09:24PM (#46404019)

    I disagree.

    what was a public broadcast back then is not even close to what is a 'broadcast' now.

    and, add to this the notion of 'store and replay later'. you could not DO that back then unless you were a recording studio. today, everyone is a 'recording studio' in terms of being able to save digital content and play it back later.

    the # of people you could reach before was limited. now, the rules are all different and you don't have to have them all tuned in at the same freq, in the same area of the world at the same time.

    add to this the fact that 'copyright' does not mean the same thing world wide and so when you send out content to the internet, not everyone is bound by US rules!

    the world in tech is so different, its not sensible to apply what we considered 'content distribution' to today's world. too much is not applicable and some things we have today were not even conceived of back then.

    laws should never be static. they need to be updated to fit the age. copyright was never updated in peoples' favor, only in corporations' favor. that, in itself, means that it was not maintained in a fair and just manner.

  • by Anubis IV (1279820) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @11:44PM (#46404855)

    Although Aereo might simply be a remote antenna you pay another party to provide, keep in mind that cable companies are required to pay retransmission fees. How is Aereo's service different than cable? After all, if companies that provide traditional Community Antenna TeleVision service must pay, why shouldn't Aereo?

    Whenever you broadcast, each person picking up the signal is effectively receiving a copy of the content. The purpose of retransmission fees is to cover those copies. In contrast, Aereo is not making new copies; it's merely working with the copies that have already been produced and to which each of its users is already entitled. That's why it's so important that they have a 1:1 ratio between antennas, storage of content, and user accounts: it proves that each of those users is legally entitled to the copy that Aereo is receiving, storing, and unicasting to them. Were they doing something like having one antenna and allowing anyone to tune into it over the 'net, this would be an entirely different matter.

As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error. -- Weisert

Working...