Aereo was just put out of business by the Supreme Court

[IAteYourMother]

why do we have to watch commercials if we have to pay monthly for cable service?

The TV provider isn't really the one putting on the ads and profiting. You pay for cable because they're acting as the middle man mediating the connection bewteen you and the channel.

 

[Ichinisan]

If you own the equipment, and only you have access to it, it's private. Because of this you should have rights to the local broadcast. You can save it, and view it remotely. You are not distributing it.

If you rent/lease/pay a monthly for the equipment and others can access it, whoever you are paying is broadcasting. It's publicly available (for a price).

I think we all agree slingbox is kosher. A weird situation could be created if I have local broadcast rights and rent it. Think about a hosted slingbox in your broadcast region, but that's not what Aereo was doing.

They are not doing one antenna/device/storage for every user. I seriously doubt they have more antennas than are channels and start recording any time anyone is watching that channel. If no one was watching an odd OTA channel, why record it? Either that, or they just say fuck it and record all channels at all times, you just tap into the feed when you watch online. Save one copy the recorded shows, stuff like that. That's all a bit of speculation, but I'm sure it's not far from the truth.

You're wrong. Aereo does has an antenna for every user and separate DVR storage per-user.

Also, cable TV started as shared community antennas. It was OK back then because it brought more viewers (thus higher ratings and higher ad revenue). The reason affiliate networks object to it now is because they already lobbied to change the law (retransmission consent) so they could extort ridiculous per-subscriber fees from TV service providers that only help them distribute the same signal they're already putting over-the-air for free

Retransmission consent needed to be repealed, not used as the basis to block innovation like this.

 

[jpiniero]

...then they better give that free broadcast spectrum back to taxpayers to make better use of.

It'll probably end up in the Cell Phone companies hands, one way or another.

 

[Ichinisan]

I don't understand a few things about aereo. If they were renting a OTA antenna and allowing me to log into that 'box' to view it like a remote TV I could see that being legal. The issue I have with that idea is they also state a couple of things under Support. One being there is a delay in progamming because it's recording and I'm watching that recording.
http://support.aereo.com/customer/p...s-there-a-slight-delay-when-i-start-watching-

http://support.aereo.com/customer/p...-can-i-watch-one-show-while-i-record-another-

If they're making a recording for me to watch, wouldn't that directly mean they're rebroadcasting it? They record it, and then stream it to me for watching. Am I missing Something there?

They're also saying they're renting me one antenna for this, but if I give them $4 more I can record a show and watch a different one. I can't find where that means I'm getting a second antenna, just I suddenly have dual channels on it. I could see them having a ton of antennas where they can pick up everything going on, but unless there's a antenna to subscriber 1 to 1 thing going on, how can that not be rebroadcasting? I have to missing something here..

Even at home, you can have multiple tuners with a single antenna. Think about it.

 

[Skel]

Even at home, you can have multiple tuners with a single antenna. Think about it.

Fair enough.. if anything I'd say they really don't explain anything on how they're doing it via their website. It's really hard to be on their side when I can't help but feel like they're hiding how they're doing it. For all I know they're just recording everything OTA and then splitting that recording up to everyone.

 

[Ichinisan]

Fair enough.. if anything I'd say they really don't explain anything on how they're doing it via their website. It's really hard to be on their side when I can't help but feel like they're hiding how they're doing it. For all I know they're just recording everything OTA and then splitting that recording up to everyone.

Huh? More than a year ago, they had videos everywhere and clear informational pages explaining and visualizing EVERYTHING.

I tried it for a month and thought it was pretty cool, but didn't really use it because I work for a cable company and get all my TV service for free anyway.

 

[Skel]

Huh? More than a year ago, they had videos everywhere and clear informational pages explaining and visualizing EVERYTHING.

I tried it for a month and thought it was pretty cool, but didn't really use it because I work for a cable company and get all my TV service for free anyway.

They should have left them on their site.. You'd think someone going to the Supreme Court would have a lot more info on what they're doing easily available.

 

[bradley]

I honestly believe the US Supreme Court needs to hire a technology consultant in such cases. You guys are making some excellent points as to why this might be a bad (or possibly incomplete) ruling. To be honest, I knew nothing about Aereo or this USSC case until today.

This ruling does open the door for a huge mess of interesting conclusions, which would only benefit cable monopolies. Cable companies are still shoving free channels in with premium channels we simple don't want, in order to wring every buck out of consumers. Yet, I don't see any ruling on that shit.

 

[Ichinisan]

They should have left them on their site.. You'd think someone going to the Supreme Court would have a lot more info on what they're doing easily available.

I don't see the videos anymore, but I do see this:
https://www.aereo.com/about

https://www.youtube.com/user/Aereo

 

[Skel]

I don't see the videos anymore, but I do see this:
https://www.aereo.com/about

https://www.youtube.com/user/Aereo

The about is where I started wondering about number of antennas. It's been a very long time since I've even looked at them, but from everything I've done and from what's in the about it's a 1 to 1. One antenna to one device. I wasn't aware of any multi tuner single antenna device. They could exist, and prob do, I just have never heard of them. The youtube stuff should be linked to the about or main page. If it had that kind of info in it, you'd think they'd want everyone to see it. It's the corner stone of their entire case... I think anyways. I seem to be wrong a lot on this..

 

[Robert Thomas]

How is sending an information stream from a storage device reserved for me over the internet to my device a broadcast rather than a closed circuit transmission? Mustn't a broadcast be a distribution to a dispersed audience?

 

[Ichinisan]

I honestly believe the US Supreme Court needs to hire a technology consultant in such cases. You guys are making some excellent points as to why this might be a bad (or possibly incomplete) ruling. To be honest, I knew nothing about Aereo or this USSC case until today.

This ruling does open the door for a huge mess of interesting conclusions, which would only benefit cable monopolies. Cable companies are still shoving free channels in with premium channels we simple don't want, in order to wring every buck out of consumers. Yet, I don't see any ruling on that shit.

Cable companies would LOVE to give you channels a la carte so you could get only the channels you actually want. The problem is, media conglomerates like Viacom won't allow it. Every time contract negotiations come up, rates increase and they force operators to carry channels people don't really want (and pay per-subscriber fees for those channels). Otherwise, they threaten to block the channels people *do* want and they put messages in the feed out providers against each other until they relent and agree to insane fee increases. Consumers fall for it when they put ads in the newspaper with Dora crying "[provider] doesn't want you to play with me any more." The TV provider gets all kinds of hate mail and attacks from customers on social media. Then rates to up and customers complain about that. Consumers lose. TV service providers lose (as customers can't afford to keep their service after rate increases). Only the media conglomerates win.

The bigger problem is that over-the-air broadcast stations think they can do the same thing.

 

[Ichinisan]

The about is where I started wondering about number of antennas. It's been a very long time since I've even looked at them, but from everything I've done and from what's in the about it's a 1 to 1. One antenna to one device. I wasn't aware of any multi tuner single antenna device. They could exist, and prob do, I just have never heard of them. The youtube stuff should be linked to the about or main page. If it had that kind of info in it, you'd think they'd want everyone to see it. It's the corner stone of their entire case... I think anyways. I seem to be wrong a lot on this..

I have an HDHomeRun Prime with 3 tuners and 1 RF input that can be used with an antenna for over-the-air (but I use it with cable). I also have a dual tuner HDHR.

I have 2x Hauppauge HVR-2250 cards with 4x tuners each (2x analog + 2x digital on each card). Each card has only one RF input.

A dual-tuner or quad-tuner TiVo works with a single antenna.

I can't say I've ever heard of a multi-tuner device that expected you to use multiple antennas.

However: The earlier version of the HDHR Dual had 2 inputs. Most users were expected to use a splitter to feed the same signal to both tuners, but had the option of connecting cable to one input and an OTA antenna to the other. A lesser-known option for people in areas with very poor reception was to set up two different directional antennas and tuning specific channels on specific tuners. The revised HDHR Dual has only one input.

[edit]
My old Sony CRT HDTV had a "DualView" mode where it used 2x tuners simultaneously with a single RF input.

VCRs could always tune one channel to record, and you could press the TV/VCR button to switch to an RF pass-thru mode that allowed you to watch another channel on your TV's tuner while the VCR was recording from another channel...so that's also 2x tuners working simultaneously from a single RF source.

 

[Robert Thomas]

Skel writes,

"It's been a very long time since I've even looked at them, but from everything I've done and from what's in the about it's a 1 to 1. One antenna to one device. I wasn't aware of any multi tuner single antenna device."

The Aereo antenna is a more complex thing.

According to

Inside Aereo: new photos of the tech that’s changing how we watch TV
by Jeff John Roberts; Gigaom FEB. 6, 2013

http://gigaom.com/2013/02/06/inside-aereo-new-photos-of-the-tech-thats-changing-how-we-watch-tv/

"Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia explained that the device is a simple copper antenna but that, rather than picking up the entire TV spectrum like a typical cable antenna, it picks up only the 6 megahertz block of spectrum that a viewer wants to see at a given time. He describes it as a "switched antenna" that’s beautiful in its simplicity. The ingenuity, Kanojia said, is that Aereo’s 1.5 inch antenna changes its electrical and magnetic characteristics in order to replicate the tasks of a standard 35 inch UFH or three foot VHF antenna."

Also, the Aereo antennas are (were?) meant to serve one customer at a time, but when not called for service are returned to a switchable pool for use by another customer.

"The size of the antenna allows Aereo to cram many of them into a small space which is one reason Aereo is able to relay TV to so many people at the same time. Another reason is that the antennas are “multitenant” which means that, when one Aereo subscriber is not using an antenna at a given time, it is available to all other subscribers."

 

[Skel]

I have an HDHomeRun Prime with 3 tuners and 1 RF input that can be used with an antenna for over-the-air (but I use it with cable). I also have a dual tuner HDHR.

I have 2x Hauppauge HVR-2250 cards with 4x tuners each (2x analog + 2x digital on each card). Each card has only one RF input.

A dual-tuner or quad-tuner TiVo works with a single antenna.

I can't say I've ever heard of a multi-tuner device that expected you to use multiple antennas.

However: The earlier version of the HDHR Dual had 2 inputs. Most users were expected to use a splitter to feed the same signal to both tuners, but had the option of connecting cable to one input and an OTA antenna to the other. A lesser-known option for people in areas with very poor reception was to set up two different directional antennas and tuning specific channels on specific tuners. The revised HDHR Dual has only one input.

[edit]
My old Sony CRT HDTV had a "DualView" mode where it used 2x tuners simultaneously with a single RF input.

VCRs could always tune one channel to record, and you could press the TV/VCR button to switch to an RF pass-thru mode that allowed you to watch another channel on your TV's tuner while the VCR was recording from another channel...so that's also 2x tuners working simultaneously from a single RF source.

I stand completely corrected. The only point I would question on Aereo is the recording before allowing me to see it. Not sure why if they're not sharing the same file they're not allowing me to watch it 'live'. As for the rest, you're right and I'm very wrong.. happens

 

[zinfamous]

I've never even heard of Aero. But I'm realizing more and more than I'm becoming a shameless luddite.

 

[Kneedragger]

If you are talking about platforms like Hulu or the network websites often they purposely limit the content to just be enough to get a "taste" so that people are motivated to buy into normal distribution channels.

They have advertising when you watch online and a few weeks ago one of the networks had me log into some deal with the local station.

I was under the impression that all the networks that broadcast OTA let you watch the shows the next day or something like that. I know they are still gonna air ads, I didnt think they would get rid of them.

I'll have to look into this.

 

[Ichinisan]

Don't most of your local networks that broadcast content OTA stream shows over the internet free on their website?

They have advertising when you watch online and a few weeks ago one of the networks had me log into some deal with the local station.

I was under the impression that all the networks that broadcast OTA let you watch the shows the next day or something like that. I know they are still gonna air ads, I didnt think they would get rid of them.

I'll have to look into this.

Some of them make you verify that you pay for TV service. This is so they can extort even higher per-subscriber fees from cable / satellite companies to enable the online streaming licensed access. I think my local ABC affiliate is one of those that does it.

It's like they've forgotten that they broadcast this stuff over the air and some of their viewers don't subscribe to any TV service.

 

[Markbnj]

Cable TV started as a community antenna on a hill or mountaintop. It was perfectly fine back then. There were no objections from broadcast networks. It would have been insane for them to object. It brings these over-the-air broadcasts to more viewers, which increases ratings and ad revenue.

Somewhere in Pennsylvania, wasn't it? The rest of the story as I heard it is that it was begun by a guy with an appliance store who wasn't able to sell TVs because the government had shut down a few TV stations as a security thing during WWII, and the people in their valley couldn't get any reception. So he put an antenna on the hill behind the store and ran a line down to a demo TV. Soon people were asking to connect to his cable and he offered to let them if they bought a set.

Not sure whether that version is accurate.

 

[Kneedragger]

Some of them make you verify that you pay for TV service. This is so they can extort even higher per-subscriber fees from cable / satellite companies to enable the online streaming licensed access. I think my local ABC affiliate is one of those that does it.

It's like they've forgotten that they broadcast this stuff over the air and some of their viewers don't subscribe to any TV service.

That's what it was. Thanks for the info.

 

[Hacp]

If you own the equipment, and only you have access to it, it's private. Because of this you should have rights to the local broadcast. You can save it, and view it remotely. You are not distributing it.

So if I rent the computer and TV tuner, park it in an apartment I also rent across the country, then remote in to that computer to watch the local channels, is that still illegal?

 

[Skel]

So if I rent the computer and TV tuner, park it in an apartment I also rent across the country, then remote in to that computer to watch the local channels, is that still illegal?

From my little understanding, if you are the only one watching it then you're legal.. or small enough no one cares. It's when you start charging people for it and not giving the content providers the cut they expect from such things do you run into issues.

 

[Ichinisan]

From my little understanding, if you are the only one watching it then you're legal.. or small enough no one cares. It's when you start charging people for it and not giving the content providers the cut they expect from such things do you run into issues.

The apartment complex and computer rental people are charging for it in his example. His question: Are they breaking the law?

The obvious answer is "no." The fact is, the SCOTUS got this one wrong.

 

[DCal430]

You're wrong. Aereo does has an antenna for every user and separate DVR storage per-user.

Also, cable TV started as shared community antennas. It was OK back then because it brought more viewers (thus higher ratings and higher ad revenue). The reason affiliate networks object to it now is because they already lobbied to change the law (retransmission consent) so they could extort ridiculous per-subscriber fees from TV service providers that only help them distribute the same signal they're already putting over-the-air for free

Retransmission consent needed to be repealed, not used as the basis to block innovation like this.

This was a claim by aereo that they are 1 to 1, this has never been shown to be true. You just are taking their word without any proof.

 

[Zee]

This was a claim by aereo that they are 1 to 1, this has never been shown to be true. You just are taking their word without any proof.

it was proven through all levels of the regional/district courts that they found a legitimate loophole.

Supreme court came in and said fuck that. This is what they meant, not what was written. Whether you agree with the decision is a different matter. Supreme Court made a bad precedence because they decided to close the loop hole on their own self interest beholdened to the companies rather than strictly uphold the law as it was written.

If the law said Tshirts were illegal, and a company said okay, cut off the sleeves and make it a tanktop. Go through all the courts, courts all see that this is true. No longer a T Shirt. Corporation panics, sues the company in Supreme Court which has less integrity. The SC said, fuck that all shirts are illegal.