SoylentNews

Aereo Suffers Loss and Hopes for Supreme Court Win

posted by Dopefish on Friday February 21 2014, @12:00PM   
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."

• Re:So the air is owned by *IAA (Score: 2, Informative) by Maow on Friday February 21 2014, @02:32PM

  by Maow (8) on Friday February 21 2014, @02:32PM (#4316) Homepage

  C.1) The viewership may not be in the area, essentially devaluing the commercials due to audience size not aligning with those geographically located near the businesses to which the commercials were sold
  C.2) The vierership may be not watching commercials for the area in which they are geographically located, possibly reducing the amount able to be charged by ohter staions which are located near the viewer.

  I haven't looked into Aereo myself, but from my understanding, they do require their customers to be within the area they're subscribing to.

  i.e. Someone in Buffalo can't subscribe to New York TV via Aereo.

  Saw that on Ars Technica I believe.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+1
  Informative=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Informative' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		2