Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Dopefish on Friday February 21 2014, @12:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-doesn't-kill-you-makes-you-stronger dept.

Fluffeh writes:

"Although there are arguments scheduled for 22 April in the Supreme Court, US District Judge Dale Kimball of Utah ruled against Aereo which effectively bans it in Utah along with the rest of the 10th Circuit, which includes Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Colorado.

Kimball ruled that Aereo's retransmission of Plaintiffs' copyrighted programs "is indistinguishable from a cable company and falls squarely within the language of the Transmit Clause." He didn't buy Aereo's argument that its system of renting a tiny antenna to each customer allows it to avoid the "Transmit Clause" of the 1976 Copyright Act, which determines what kind of "transmissions" of copyrighted material must pay licensing fees."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by cockroach on Friday February 21 2014, @12:30PM

    by cockroach (2266) on Friday February 21 2014, @12:30PM (#4264)

    ... but it would be nice to have a word or two about who/what Aereo is in the summary.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Fluffeh on Friday February 21 2014, @12:32PM

    by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 21 2014, @12:32PM (#4265) Journal

    You know, that's a great point. I will try to keep this in mind the next time I submit a story :)

    • (Score: 1) by cockroach on Friday February 21 2014, @12:38PM

      by cockroach (2266) on Friday February 21 2014, @12:38PM (#4267)

      Heh, thanks, that would be appreciated!

  • (Score: 2, Informative) by SlimmPickens on Friday February 21 2014, @01:35PM

    by SlimmPickens (1056) on Friday February 21 2014, @01:35PM (#4280)

    I vaguely remember this from a green news site. Something about having a separate antenna for every customer was supposed to mean they could somehow avoid redistribution fees.