1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Supreme Court decsion may effect Tivo?

Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by eboydog, Apr 21, 2014.

  1. Apr 21, 2014 #1 of 323
    eboydog

    eboydog Just TiVo'ing.....

    904
    0
    Mar 23, 2006
    Tomorrow (Tuesday April the 22nd) the United States Supreme court will begin hearing arguments which may pull the plug on Aereo and have lasting effects over streaming live TV to mobile devices.

    If so, will Tivo Stream be effected by such?? I never heard of Aereo until now but what they do is very similier to how Tivo streams content to Apple and hopefully soon to Android devices?

    http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2014/04/21/why-the-supreme-court-might-pull-the-plug-on-aereo/
     
  2. Apr 22, 2014 #2 of 323
    telemark

    telemark New Member

    1,544
    1
    Nov 12, 2013
    All the briefs are filed and on the SCOTUS blog.

    The Aero case contains rather narrow questions, like when do multiple private performances constitute a public performance.

    Tivo's not likely to be negatively affected as they developed their products to conform with the history of legal precedents, by a safe distance.

    While the SCOTUS in theory has the power to upheave a lot of this, they tend not to, and only change the minimum.
     
  3. Apr 22, 2014 #3 of 323
    jcthorne

    jcthorne Active Member

    2,722
    3
    Jan 28, 2002
    Houston
    I hate to say it but a decision in Aereo's favor could negatively impact Tivo for many years. It could spell the end of broadcast tv as we now know it. If Aereo is allowed to proceed with its business model, all the cable tv and satellite providers will do nearly the same. Thus ending the payment system to broadcasters for content. If this happens, the content will cease and most all of it will move to paytv. OTA would become nearly as unused as AM radio.
     
  4. Apr 22, 2014 #4 of 323
    wmcbrine

    wmcbrine Ziphead

    10,368
    22
    Aug 2, 2003
    That seems a bit hysterical. They're already giving away their content "free" to people with (regular) antennas. It's paid for by ads. I know they like the double revenue stream, but there was a time when they did without it, and they did fine. Some stations do without it now (invoking must-carry rather than negotiating for fees).

    Also, the Aereo system has trouble scaling, and it's not clear to me that it could be applied to the cable/satellite model anyway, in a technical/legal sense.

    Edit: It's only 10% of revenue, apparently --

    [​IMG]

    http://www.businessweek.com/article...reme-court-showdown-wont-end-tv-as-we-know-it
     
  5. Apr 22, 2014 #5 of 323
    unitron

    unitron Active Member

    16,389
    2
    Apr 28, 2006
    semi-coastal NC
    Local broadcasters are not going to give up broadcasting, even if the networks dump them. There's still too much money to be made wrapping ads around the local news and especially the weather.

    I wonder if you understand exactly what it is that Aereo does.

    If they succeed in court, it'll only mean that the court agrees with the position which they have taken, which is that leasing antennas to individuals does not constitute a "re-transmission" the way it has been ruled that cable and satellite services do.

    This will mean that Aereo doesn't have to pay the broadcasters any more than the guy with the rabbit ears hooked to his TV or DVR in his own living room, and that cable and satellite will have to keep paying, just like they do now.
     
  6. Apr 22, 2014 #6 of 323
    mcf57

    mcf57 Member

    157
    0
    Oct 19, 2012
    GA
    I have also heard that several of the broadcast networks (I think CBS and Fox specifically) have basically said that if Aereo is allowed to continue with the way they do things (aka....they win the case), they will pull all their local networks from the free airwaves (only in those markets served by Aereo) and put them on cable only. Whether that is an empty threat or not is remained to be seen.

    I am in the Atlanta market and we are served by Aereo. I think for now there is only about 11 markets that Aereo serve and they are all on the east coast and the midwest. Therefore, maybe they can risk this possible move, but I know there will not be a lot of happy people here in ATL if this happens. Plus, I can't imagine local affiliates like this possible plan either.

    I am also not sure why they aren't on the west coast yet or if they have plans. Not even listed as "coming soon" for cities like Denver, LA or Seattle. Maybe its simply a business plan and they don't want to expand too much before they get things stabilized.
     
  7. Apr 22, 2014 #7 of 323
    atmuscarella

    atmuscarella Well-Known Member

    5,738
    26
    Oct 11, 2005
    Rochester NY
    If Aero wins this fight will not be over, the next move will be for the networks/broadcasters to try and get the laws changed to make what Aero is doing illegal.

    It is a fairly new event that local channels have been able to force cable to pay for their feeds and is only possible because of the competition between cable & satellite.

    In my opinion if local channels can force cable & satellite to pay for their feeds then cable & satellite should be able to provide any ABC, CBS, CW, NBC, Fox, or PBS channel they want to form anyplace in the country.
     
  8. Apr 22, 2014 #8 of 323
    slowbiscuit

    slowbiscuit FUBAR

    3,507
    19
    Sep 19, 2006
    In the ATL
    The word is 'affect', not 'effect', OP. Serious misuse that happens all the time unfortunately.
     
  9. Apr 22, 2014 #9 of 323
    Grakthis

    Grakthis New Member

    828
    0
    Oct 4, 2006

    Wait, what? In what world would broadcasters stop broadcasting because now someone else can carry their content without paying them? You know that for decades the broadcasters received no carry fees, and were DELIGHTED when cable companies wanted to carry their channels, right?
     
  10. Apr 22, 2014 #10 of 323
    atmuscarella

    atmuscarella Well-Known Member

    5,738
    26
    Oct 11, 2005
    Rochester NY
    Here yu go:
     
  11. Apr 22, 2014 #11 of 323
    aadam101

    aadam101 Tell me a joke

    7,029
    0
    Jul 14, 2002
    Massachusetts
    Tivo seems to be shying away from OTA users anyway. This has minimal impact on Tivo. Now it might have Stream implications depending on how laws will get changed.
     
  12. Apr 22, 2014 #12 of 323
    unitron

    unitron Active Member

    16,389
    2
    Apr 28, 2006
    semi-coastal NC
    Television broadcast licenses are valuable.

    In the case where the local broadcast affiliate is actually owned by the network with which it is affiliated (those are called O&Os, for owned and operated), I don't see them giving up those licenses.

    In the case of markets where someone else owns the station that's affiliated with a particular network, expect lots of lawsuiting if the network tries to take away that affiliation and remain in the market via cable.
     
  13. Apr 22, 2014 #13 of 323
    eboydog

    eboydog Just TiVo'ing.....

    904
    0
    Mar 23, 2006
    Sorry, the effect of the affect isn't a issue of desert in the desert as long as you ate all you can ate which ate bad for $1.99..... :)

    I be remaining a major killer of the English language.



    Back on topic, the issue comes down to greed, the broadcasters are seeing the transition of more mobile device multimedia streaming content and they want part of the pie without doing anything different. I believe Aereo will lose this fight as they aren't paying the local broadcasters to carry their content.

    If they win, this invalidates the aspect that a cable or satellite provider must pay a local broadcaster to carry their local broadcast which such I really doubt will happen due to past precedent including the end of local OTA broadcasting. Can the government really dictate what one can receive using OTA content, unfortunately yes, despite being free the broadcasters interest is making money and providing a public service is no longer important.

    The major broadcasters oppose this because despite the small amount of revenue they receive to allow their content to be retransmitted, revenue is revenue and no one wants to lose revenue.

    As far as affecting Tivo Stream, if Aereo loses my concern is that may place the precedent of placing a fee on the retransmission of content to mobile devices when the content is recorded or transmitted on a dvr. Does Tivo pay a fee that allows them to transport the recorded content of a major broadcaster such a NBC, CBS or Fox? Were does it stop if streaming from a private dvr to another device is deemed a violation of copyright content?

    As long as such streamed content is reserved for private single consumption and not a public performance, there shouldn't be any regulatory issues or copyright infringement. All this is the big boys missing out on something they can't control or make money off of.
     
  14. Apr 22, 2014 #14 of 323
    JosephB

    JosephB Member

    680
    0
    Nov 19, 2010
    Birmingham, AL
    This wouldn't affect TiVo, since the issue at hand is the ownership of the retransmission device (the antennas) and whether renting out remotely hosted ones is the same thing as cable tv. The fact that a Roamio or Stream is hosted by you, and only available to you, has been generally accepted as fair use (hence the reason Slingbox hasn't been sued out of existence). Also, even though you are "retransmitting" your cable or antenna content with Roamio/Stream or Slingbox, the channels are still getting paid because you're paying for cable in most cases. In Aereo's case, it presents a real threat to actual revenue streams.
     
  15. Apr 22, 2014 #15 of 323
    zalusky

    zalusky Active Member TCF Club

    5,051
    10
    Apr 5, 2002
    Cupertino, CA
    Seems to me that they are less valuable these days. In San Francisco the ABC owned station is mandating salary cuts and people are leaving.

    I think OTA and the broadcast model is fading. With all the alternative delivery vehicles there is no growth in the local stations.
    Kids today do not get their media through local stations just us old fogies.

    If anything I expect pressure someday to get those licenses back for more IP Wifi.
     
  16. Apr 22, 2014 #16 of 323
    BobCamp1

    BobCamp1 Active Member

    1,348
    9
    May 15, 2002
    It's also the content providers. The NFL and NHL have threatened to make their games cable-only. It's trivial to set up Aereo to replace NFL Sunday Ticket or NHL Center Ice, since most of those subscribers just watch one team anyway.
     
  17. Apr 22, 2014 #17 of 323
    JosephB

    JosephB Member

    680
    0
    Nov 19, 2010
    Birmingham, AL
    The local model is both growing and shrinking. Previously news organizations didn't have to show a profit. Now they do. Now they don't get to just ride on the rest of the money the station earns. Plus, networks are extracting most of the retrans fees from cable companies, so that money doesn't stay local.
     
  18. Apr 22, 2014 #18 of 323
    slowbiscuit

    slowbiscuit FUBAR

    3,507
    19
    Sep 19, 2006
    In the ATL
    Yeah, funny you are with your broken link. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries. If you don't get that, search for it on YouTube and this time link it correctly.
     
  19. Apr 22, 2014 #19 of 323
    unitron

    unitron Active Member

    16,389
    2
    Apr 28, 2006
    semi-coastal NC
    A receiving antenna is not a "retransmission device".

    At least not from a technology standpoint, and so far not from a legal standpoint.

    Once some court is stupid enough to say that it is, the broadcasters will try to get the government to implement (and collect on their behalf, but turn over to them) some kind of antenna tax on any household with a TV set.

    Or else they won't do so and Aereo can argue discrimination when it goes back to court.

    So it'll be a mess either way.


    Whether a Slingbox, or a "streaming capable" DVR or other set top box is a re-transmission device is a different issue, both legally and from a technological standpoint.
     
  20. Apr 22, 2014 #20 of 323
    atmuscarella

    atmuscarella Well-Known Member

    5,738
    26
    Oct 11, 2005
    Rochester NY
    Ya messed up the link it should be fixed now. Or you can amuse yourself via this direct link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vf8N6GpdM
     

Share This Page