Official AEREO Discussion Thread - Page 18 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 17Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #511 of 593 Old 06-18-2014, 11:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keenan View Post
Yes, instead of trying to stop progress and just rent-seek, embrace new technology, take it for your own and make something even bigger and better. With the resources the networks have they could easily produce something that would blow away any offering from Aereo.

I think in the end Aereo will be purchased by one of the networks or consortium of networks and put to death. Or, maybe they'll actually do something with and move in to the future with the rest of us.
Or, maybe the condition for continuing will be they have to pay fair market value retransmission fees in line with cable and satellite providers.

While it wouldn't be surprising if the networks would want Aereo dead, it's also possible they'd rather have the money.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NetworkTV is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #512 of 593 Old 06-18-2014, 11:34 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 270
That depends on how the threat of pulling the programming off of OTA and sending it to cable is interpreted. I took it to mean yanking network programming away from affiliates and fronting CBS, ABC etc. national cable channels.

Under your scenario, the affiliates will balk because, without being able to transmit network programming OTA, the local cable company will have full control over the station's success or failure. They'd have to abide by whatever terms the cableco dictated in order to get their programming and lifeblood advertising onto the systems.

Let's say I own the cable system in Podunk, Oklahoma, where the local CBS affiliate is KPDK. I'm going to CHARGE KPDK for access to my system. Must-carry won't be in affect since the programming will not be over-the-air. I won't lose customers to DSS because they don't provide LIL into Podunk to begin with. Even if they did, the CBS stream isn't over-the-air so DSS isn't obligated in any way. And I don't care if CBS yanks Showtime. Meh. I own the internet backbone for Podunk so even DSS customers have to pay me. With no way to get advertisements to viewers and no leverage, KPDK dies.

While O&Os would be able to negotiate carriage of the network program stream with large cable operators, the little guy won't have a prayer. Though I do imagine the Sinclair vs Comcast carriage battle in this scenario would be epic.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #513 of 593 Old 06-18-2014, 11:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 191
My prediction is they won't get a free pass. Shutdown completely (by x date) with the "suggestion" of obtaining the rights to generate revenue from such content.

| 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
Charles R is offline  
post #514 of 593 Old 06-18-2014, 11:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mark12547's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Salem, Oregon, United States
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post
I don't see how this could affect the affiliates at all.

Pulling the OTA feed would mean the affiliates would still be on pay TV in each market, just not OTA.
But wouldn't that mean losing almost half the eyeballs, which then means losing a big chunk of advertising dollars to support the local affiliate and its ability to pay the network for programming?
DrDon likes this.

My very humble setup:
Man Cave:Vizio E500i-A1 "Smart TV" (50-in 1080p 120Hz LED/LCD, has Netflix app.), Blu-ray players (Sony BDP-S3100, old LG BD390), Roku (the original model: N1000), PC (Windows 7), Comcast Internet (25Mbps/5Mbps).
Bedroom:LG 32LV3400-UA TV (32-in 768p 60Hz LED/LCD), HD DVR (Motorola RNG200N), Xfinity Comcast cable (Digital Starter Package), DVD/VHS player.
Mark12547 is online now  
post #515 of 593 Old 06-19-2014, 10:31 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark12547 View Post
But wouldn't that mean losing almost half the eyeballs, which then means losing a big chunk of advertising dollars to support the local affiliate and its ability to pay the network for programming?
Half?

More like less than 10%. Over 90% of linear TV viewers have some form of pay TV service.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #516 of 593 Old 06-20-2014, 12:34 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mark12547's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Salem, Oregon, United States
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post
Half?

More like less than 10%. Over 90% of linear TV viewers have some form of pay TV service.
According to this 2013 study, 19.3% of households with TVs in the United States rely solely on over-the-air signals to watch TV programming. So it looks like you were closer to the number than I was.

Losing those eyeballs would still impact the bottom line, though not as much as I first thought.

My very humble setup:
Man Cave:Vizio E500i-A1 "Smart TV" (50-in 1080p 120Hz LED/LCD, has Netflix app.), Blu-ray players (Sony BDP-S3100, old LG BD390), Roku (the original model: N1000), PC (Windows 7), Comcast Internet (25Mbps/5Mbps).
Bedroom:LG 32LV3400-UA TV (32-in 768p 60Hz LED/LCD), HD DVR (Motorola RNG200N), Xfinity Comcast cable (Digital Starter Package), DVD/VHS player.
Mark12547 is online now  
post #517 of 593 Old 06-21-2014, 07:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark12547 View Post
According to this 2013 study, 19.3% of households with TVs in the United States rely solely on over-the-air signals to watch TV programming. So it looks like you were closer to the number than I was.

Losing those eyeballs would still impact the bottom line, though not as much as I first thought.
I'm not sure I buy that number at face value.

I'll bet some percentage of households in that group also use streaming media to support their viewing, such as through Netflix or closer to the air date with Hulu. That means they aren't completely dead in the water with OTA.

While certainly financial issues play a role in a large amount of those viewers, I'd bet at least 5% of those are cord cutters that also stream programming. Plus, the number of people who can afford pay TV, but go OTA only because they can to save money probably brings the actual loss of audience closer to my estimation.

Having said that, that number is up from 14% in 2010, so linear OTA viewers are increasing. Ironic as the FCC wants to sell off the spectrum to cell companies...so people can stream more content...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by NetworkTV; 06-21-2014 at 07:05 AM.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #518 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 07:42 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 22,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 360
just in:

Supreme Court reverses lower court ruling and rules against AEREO 6-3

Last edited by markrubin; 06-25-2014 at 07:48 AM.
markrubin is offline  
post #519 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 07:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
tveli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: southern NH
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Huzzah SCOTUS !

Aereo marketeers, please feel free to try again, but this time without being lying liars about how antennas work.
(Or provide a demo where a single dime-sized antenna can be used to tune an arbitrary ATSC signal -
and then we'll dig up Schrodinger so he can adjust his equations accordingly and be an expert witness on Aereo's behalf.)

http://nypost.com/2014/06/25/supreme...-broadcasters/

Thanks to SCOTUS' ruling, I can cancel my order for bumper stickers and t-shirts which say: "Aereo lied, broadcast TV died".
tveli is offline  
post #520 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:10 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 22,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 360
link to link to ruling itself

US Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Aereo Case
markrubin is offline  
post #521 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:31 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post
Aereo marketeers, please feel free to try again, but this time without being lying liars about how antennas work.
(Or provide a demo where a single dime-sized antenna can be used to tune an arbitrary ATSC signal
The way I read the ruling, I'm not sure that proof would have helped them, since the "public performance" condition appears to have been met by the intention to provide, not the method of.

But, no matter. The whole exercise demonstrated a market for the service. One that copyright owners will be looking to monetize. If I were Aereo, I'd be looking to negotiate carriage fees. Do that, and the whole dime-size antenna thing goes out the window. You could put up just one nicely configured antenna to lock on to even the lowest-powered local stations. And, no matter how many subscribers set a recording on their "virtual DVRs," Aereo would only need to work from one copy. Also would leave them free to add in some cable networks, (though probably not the big guns). And the whole package would still be less than basic cable.

Will be interesting to see where it all goes from here.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #522 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:38 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 22,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 360
yeah the ruling was based on violation of copyright laws: to me Aereo was clearly in violation of copyright laws

I don't think Aereo can negotiate fees and still run a successful business: the broadcasters will not let it survive
markrubin is offline  
post #523 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
snowcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 637
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 53
I was intrigued by the dissenting opinion of Justice Scalia. He basically is saying that the court ruled this way only because Aereo looked like cable TV, rather than any definitive violation of the law.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...3-461_l537.pdf
snowcat is online now  
post #524 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:40 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 270
Moderator note: First post of this thread edited to reflect the ruling. Seemed confusing to leave the original post at the top, though I didn't delete it for contextual purposes. Thought about starting a new thread, but there's too much useful information in this one and it's probably the one everyone has bookmarked.



Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post
I don't think Aereo can negotiate fees and still run a successful business: the broadcasters will not let it survive
You're right about that. They'd need all of the stations in a particular market to sign on and that's probably not happening. Though it would be the smart move for network affiliates. Extends the reach for advertising purposes (don't think for a minute they'd agree on carriage fees without some guarantee that DVR functions would not work during commercials) and they don't have to spend the money to provide the same service, themselves. But what's smart isn't always what's done.
markrubin likes this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.

Last edited by DrDon; 06-25-2014 at 08:46 AM.
DrDon is offline  
post #525 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mntneer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Martinsburg, WV
Posts: 2,737
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowcat View Post
I was intrigued by the dissenting opinion of Justice Scalia. He basically is saying that the court ruled this way only because Aereo looked like cable TV, rather than any definitive violation of the law.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...3-461_l537.pdf

His opinion gets it more correct IMHO. This ruling could also call into question remote DVR services that other providers offer.

I'd like to think Aereo could negotiate with the broadcasters, but these days they all want a larger piece of the pie and we will continue to have fragmented offerings online. Want NBC? Use NBC's app. Want Fox? Use Fox's. Or pay out the rear for Cable or Sat.
Mntneer is offline  
post #526 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 08:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDTVChallenged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,395
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 134
So when can I expect them to come for my rooftop antennas? ... Or start putting GPS chips in our receivers? ... Laugh at me now, but remember you were warned.
HDTVChallenged is offline  
post #527 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 09:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Otto Pylot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 7,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTVChallenged View Post
So when can I expect them to come for my rooftop antennas? ... Or start putting GPS chips in our receivers? ... Laugh at me now, but remember you were warned.
They'll have to pry my rooftop antenna from my cold, dead hands first
Otto Pylot is online now  
post #528 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 09:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post
My prediction is they won't get a free pass. Shutdown completely (by x date) with the "suggestion" of obtaining the rights to generate revenue from such content.
I thought it would go this way... and rather glad at that. Looks like those who sided on the other side did so only because they thought...

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, arguing that Aereo successfully exploited a loophole in the federal Copyright Act.

"It is not the role of this court to identify and plug loopholes," Scalia said. "It is the role of good lawyers to identify and exploit them, and the role of Congress to eliminate them if it wishes.


Not because they felt they were in the right... rather they were wrong and attempting to use a loophole.

| 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
Charles R is offline  
post #529 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 10:03 AM
Member
 
Pienza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Grapevine, TX
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post
I thought it would go this way... and rather glad at that. Looks like those who sided on the other side did so only because they thought...

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, arguing that Aereo successfully exploited a loophole in the federal Copyright Act.

"It is not the role of this court to identify and plug loopholes," Scalia said. "It is the role of good lawyers to identify and exploit them, and the role of Congress to eliminate them if it wishes.


Not because they felt they were in the right... rather they were wrong and attempting to use a loophole.
Aereo came close to winning on a technicality, but it lost completely on emotional appeal.

From the 2nd to last page of Scalia's dissent "I share the Court’s evident feeling that what Aereo is doing (or enabling to be done) to the Networks’ copyrighted programming ought not to be allowed." My inference is that none of the justices wanted Aereo to prevail, but the dissenters didn't want to disrupt existing case law with the "looks like CATV" approach.

It will be interesting to see where this case goes from here and whether any any existing technologies will be affected by the ruling. For example if commercials are copyrighted, could Dish's Hopper be penalized for not transmitting them?
Pienza is offline  
post #530 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 10:06 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTVChallenged View Post
So when can I expect them to come for my rooftop antennas?
Never. Remember, politicians NEED the media, so they're not going to do much that'll make them mad. They have in the past and they paid dearly.

Unless, of course, you mean your Homeowners Association. In which case they'll probably be by this afternoon. I get a threatening letter a couple times a year.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #531 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 10:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
snowcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 637
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pienza View Post
It will be interesting to see where this case goes from here and whether any any existing technologies will be affected by the ruling. For example if commercials are copyrighted, could Dish's Hopper be penalized for not transmitting them?
Can you be penalized for not showing something? I don't think you can violate a copyright if the you aren't "performing" that material.

As long as my Tablo setup is still good, I can live with this ruling. There are still a lot of options for consumers to DVR OTA signals, though they all require access to their own antenna.
snowcat is online now  
post #532 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 10:31 AM
Senior Member
 
borntocoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto Pylot View Post
They'll have to pry my rooftop antenna from my cold, dead hands first
\

I don't receive any programming from a cord or an antenna (I "Cut the Cord" 7 1/2 years ago). I refuse to pay $139.00 a month to watch crappy programming infested with advertising.
They'll have to pry my DVDs and VHS Tapes from my cold, dead hands instead. (These days I purchase used DVDs and VHS Tapes from Garage Sales. I can get TV Shows and Movies for pennies on the dollar. Take $65.00 (This is what a Pay-TV Provider charged for their "Basic" Tier in 2007), multiply that by $0.10 to $50 for VHS Tapes and $0.25 to $1.00 for DVDs. Now multiply that amount by 12, then multiply that by 7.5. For TV multiply your sum by 4 to 6 TV episodes for each disk and you'll come pretty good as to the size of my mammoth collection. Hollywood may rejoice with today's decision, but the handwriting on the wall says they're heading for a crash, and when it happens don't say I didn't warn you!

Excuse me now while I place one of those disks in my Blue-Ray Player, I'm going to watch an STNG episode called Yesterday's Enterprise uncut and advertising FREE.
borntocoast is offline  
post #533 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 11:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Otto Pylot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 7,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 242
^^^^^ I hear ya. We never did pay for tv. At one time I had a PirateTV antenna a very long time ago when HBO was still broadcasting in our area via tower. But that was free. We did have a huge collection of DVDs etc but once my son went to graduate school, he took them with him because he bought most of it. I still put up with OTA advertising but with streaming and what not, it balances out. I just pay for my internet connection and that's it, which, btw, is an independent service so I don't have to put up with Comcrap or any of the others.
Otto Pylot is online now  
post #534 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 11:02 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 270
Getting off topic, here. This isn't the cord-cutting thread. It's the Aereo thread. Keep discussions to that, please.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #535 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 12:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jtbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Clinton, SC
Posts: 3,822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTVChallenged View Post
So when can I expect them to come for my rooftop antennas?
When you start splitting your antenna feed, distributing the extra signals to your neighbors, and charging them for it.
DrDon likes this.
jtbell is offline  
post #536 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 01:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 422
I posted this in the other Aereo thread, but I figured I'd mention it here, too.

I guess the real question now is, what is the network's goal at this point? Is it to kill Aereo or to get them to pay retransmission fees? If it's the former, the Aereo is basically dead.

If it's the latter, then there's hope that Aereo could continue after negotiating the fees similar to what is being collected on regular cable services. At that point, Aereo would gain two things: the right to resume service in markets they were locked out of by local injunctions and potential customers that might have been wary of subscribing with a pending court decision coming. If they get the rights, people who would otherwise be nervous about a company being sued might be more likely to subscribe.

Until we know for sure what the networks' goals are, Aereo's lifespan will be held in limbo like a gladiator waiting for the thumbs up or down from the emperor.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #537 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 01:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post
I guess the real question now is, what is the network's goal at this point? Is it to kill Aereo or to get them to pay retransmission fees?
My guess is rightfully or wrongfully they aren't ready to deal with streaming their content (too many unresolved issues/parties) as such they simply want it killed.

"This is a terrific victory for anybody who's involved in the content business," and encourages the production of more programming, CBS Chief Executive Leslie Moonves said on CNBC. "This is a very pro-consumer thing, and frankly for Aereo to say that it isn't, you know, is a little bit of sour grapes."

| 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|

Last edited by Charles R; 06-25-2014 at 01:34 PM.
Charles R is offline  
post #538 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 01:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
zaphod7501's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Peoria Illinois
Posts: 1,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 32
If AEREO lost because they have been declared a "Cable Company", (due to the dubious claim of "individual antennas") then do they also have to go through State and Local franchising laws? Broadcasters might not be the only obstacle to continuation.

Sturgeon's Law: "Nothing is always absolutely so."
Sturgeons Revelation: "Ninety percent of everything is crud."
My Thoughts: "A reasoned argument must share some basic common points."
zaphod7501 is online now  
post #539 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 05:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 766
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Now that SCOTUS has ruled that Aereo may not legally provide its service without securing retransmission consent from the local broadcast stations, the question becomes whether any stations will be willing to give consent at a price that is consistent with Aereo's survival.

I cannot imagine that Aereo would be able to pay as much as the cable and satellite providers for the privilege or retransmitting one of the Big Four networks, so local broadcasters would be reluctant to give Aereo retransmission consent for those feeds.

But what about the diginets, the subchannel networks that sometimes don't even get carriage on cable or satellite?
Would local broadcasters be willing to sell Aereo retransmission rights for those channels? Or in some areas where ordinary OTA reception is difficult, would a diginet just go straight to Aereo and forget about trying to line up a local broadcast station?

In other words, is there any way that Aereo could be a viable low-cost service that becomes a rival to Netflix or other providers that do not depend on local broadcast stations?
veedon is offline  
post #540 of 593 Old 06-25-2014, 06:23 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
In other words, is there any way that Aereo could be a viable low-cost service that becomes a rival to Netflix or other providers that do not depend on local broadcast stations?
I think they were a one-trick pony. Their only (real) attraction was the valuable content they offered and since they obviously didn't pay anything for it they could turn around and offer it for a low price. If they tried to compete on level ground either they would be very expensive (if they offered anything anyone actually wanted to view) or offer little or no content anyone would care to view even at a low price.

Of course they could morph into anything (any number of existing services). I simply don't see how they are going to do it better than another company already in place. At this point they would be starting from scratch...

Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
But what about the diginets, the subchannel networks that sometimes don't even get carriage on cable or satellite?
Would local broadcasters be willing to sell Aereo retransmission rights for those channels?
I know zip about retransmission consent and rights but I think local stations in many cases wouldn't have the ability to sell their own content via the Internet. The content providers would have to give their blessing.

| 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
Charles R is offline  
Reply HDTV Programming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off