Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Issues 'Sweeping And Definitive' Ruling Against Aereo In Huge Copyright Case
Business Insider ^ | 06/25/2014 | STEVE KOVACH AND ERIN FUCHS

Posted on 06/25/2014 7:21:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

The Supreme Court ruling on Aereo is out, and the court has ruled against the upstart company and in favor of TV broadcasters. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision that had ruled in favor of Aero, a service that lets you stream live network TV.

The court found that Aereo's service violated the copyrights of live network TV stations.

"This ruling appears sweeping and definitive, determining that Aereo is illegal," the lawyer Tom Goldstein wrote on SCOTUSBlog.

The case will have lasting implications for the way content is delivered online.

Aereo's technology uses special HD antennas that are about the size of a thumbnail to pull in broadcast TV from the airwaves. The signal is then transferred over the internet to your device.

Copyright law generally allows you to seek permission before broadcasting a public performance. In arguing that its service was legal, Aereo said the TV broadcasts counted as private performances because they were broadcast through individual antennas into people's homes.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Society
KEYWORDS: aereo; aero; broadcasttv; copyright; lawsuit; newmedia; onlinecontent; ruling; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

1 posted on 06/25/2014 7:21:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yeah! The court is getting them right this term. Now as long as they rule for Holly Lobby, I will be very impressed with the Supremes in 2014.


2 posted on 06/25/2014 7:40:47 AM PDT by napscoordinator (Governor Scott Walker 2016 for the future of the country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Someone needs to help me out with this one. If I put one of their antennae on my television, then could I watch the programming that that antenna picked up? I would guess that I could. So, then what if I had a wifi device that took that signal from the TV and sent it to all my other devices in my house. Did the Supreme Court just rule that such an arrangement would violate copyright laws?


3 posted on 06/25/2014 7:42:34 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

this is a ridiculous ruling..


4 posted on 06/25/2014 7:42:50 AM PDT by tophat9000 (An Eye for an Eye, a Word for a Word...nothing more)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Aereo's technology uses special HD antennas that are about the size of a thumbnail to pull in broadcast TV from the airwaves. The signal is then transferred over the internet to your device.

OK, I get how rebroadcasting without paying for the original material is a violation and harmful to the broadcaster (assuming changes are made or advertising added), but if the broadcast signal is simply being captured and repeated via the Internet (inclusive of commercials), I'm trying to identify any damage to the broadcaster.

5 posted on 06/25/2014 7:44:10 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

yes it’s means anytime you pick up a signal and change to a different medium to tranport... the ruling it is a copyright violation.

I was part of the MAI Basic 4- Prime copyright case back in the 80’s.... look it up ....the court ruled that when you load a program from your hard drive into memory on your computer that was a copyright violation...


6 posted on 06/25/2014 7:48:10 AM PDT by tophat9000 (An Eye for an Eye, a Word for a Word...nothing more)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

So if I want to back up my favorite DVDs and make a copy on my computer, I’m violating copyright? Even though the only user of the material is me, the original purchaser?


7 posted on 06/25/2014 7:54:12 AM PDT by LostInBayport (When there are more people riding in the cart than there are pulling it, the cart stops moving...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So if I have an outdoor antenna and an amplified distribution system in my house, that would be a copyright violation?


8 posted on 06/25/2014 7:55:19 AM PDT by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

Suppose you buy some commercial time on your local TV station, and you pay pretty good chunk of change, since you go after a certain demographic.. and all of your shops are in a 50-75 mile area.. plus, your commercials are all in prime time. Joe Six pack half way across the county hooked up to Aereo is not ripping you off as much as Aereo is they are stealing the program your sponsoring! Theft of Service.


9 posted on 06/25/2014 7:57:33 AM PDT by A. Morgan (Ayn Rand: "You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Damn. The monopolies win again.


10 posted on 06/25/2014 7:59:21 AM PDT by Solson (The Voters stole the election! And the establishment wants it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

Thanks, but that seems to imply that taping a program on an old VCR tape is also a violation. I thought that was settled long ago in favor of private use.


11 posted on 06/25/2014 8:03:46 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: A. Morgan
bad logic..i did not block your broadcast market..I expand the area the it was seen.

how is this different then a vcr ?

A vcr shifts the viewing of your ad in time..this shifted the viewing of your ad in location....what would have more impact on your??.

Time shifting of viewing (vcr) vs location adding of viewing (this product)

I shift your local customer seeing you ad in time and they miss that time window to do business with you.. they can not call back in time and order...you lose a local sale.

I add a physical location seeing your ad outside of your market i did nothing to stop viewing in you intended place and time..I only added viewers..and the only impact to you is you might gain an extra customer calling on you from outside your market.

13 posted on 06/25/2014 8:45:20 AM PDT by tophat9000 (An Eye for an Eye, a Word for a Word...nothing more)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

14 posted on 06/25/2014 8:53:55 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
That the thing.. this is a crazy ruling..It would open up challenges to a lot of things once considered settled.

lets take one thing for example..slingbox.. is you having and using a slingbox now illegal?

15 posted on 06/25/2014 9:01:56 AM PDT by tophat9000 (An Eye for an Eye, a Word for a Word...nothing more)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000
I think the Slingbox will stay legal because it's one-to-one retransmission of TV broadcasts--only one user can usually access a Slingbox unit.
16 posted on 06/25/2014 9:11:17 AM PDT by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

They tried this with VCR’s and eventually lost. Now they block you from recording in hi def as they require manufacturers to remove the hdmi out from recorders. You get 480 instead. There are ways around this but it was made difficult so the content providers can have control and limit your choice of device.

You have ISP companies like Comcast restricting the amount of data because they know you will cut the cord and just use internet to view tv shows. They are charging more and more money for just internet when the price should be going down.

Example is cellphone tethering (view on bigger computer screen). You can have unlimited data on the phone but the cellphone companies with either not allow tethering or restrict you. I have T-Mobile and their $30 plan. If I tether they will pop up a screen saying pay them more....

I use PDAnet to hide the tethering.


17 posted on 06/25/2014 9:13:40 AM PDT by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: A. Morgan
Again sticking with the rebroadcast presumption, its hard to make a case for monetary damages deriving from increasing the size of a broadcast audience, no matter its location.

Now if I'm in Chicago watching local Jacksonville TV, the Chicago broadcaster might suffer from a decreased audience and therefore, the mother network might be able to get less from their Chicago affiliate, but that would be offset by the increase in viewing for Jacksonville. So the network is cost neutral.

Also, if I am watching local Jacksonville programming while in Chicago, it would likely be based on a tie I have to Jacksonville (maybe I'm a business traveler), so I really would be the target audience for that broadcast.

Is it a copy-write infringement to read a book to a room full of kids? What if I do it over Skype?

Again, it seems that the issue would not be copy-write, but rather monetary damages, which would apply from collecting fees, selling additional advertising, or deleting existing advertising.

18 posted on 06/25/2014 9:14:03 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
Someone needs to help me out with this one. If I put one of their antennae on my television, then could I watch the programming that that antenna picked up? I would guess that I could. So, then what if I had a wifi device that took that signal from the TV and sent it to all my other devices in my house.

That's not the way Areeo works (er, worked). In their business model you "buy" an antenna that's hosted in some warehouse they own, and the signal received on that antenna is stored and available to you over the internet. It's essentially a way to pick up non-local programming through what Aereo thought was a loophole in the copyright laws.

19 posted on 06/25/2014 9:14:45 AM PDT by kevkrom (I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Solson
Damn. The monopolies win again.

This seems to be par-for-course these days.

20 posted on 06/25/2014 9:45:47 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson