Aereo Wins Preliminary Injunction Hearing

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Aereo Wins Preliminary Injunction Hearing

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday July 12, 2012 @12:11AM from the stream-away dept.

bs0d3 writes "Aereo, a company that offers live broadcast TV via the internet to New York City residents, has won a preliminary injunction hearing. A federal judge has rejected a bid by major U.S. broadcasters to stop Aereo from rebroadcasting some of their programming over the Internet. District Judge Alison Nathan said that while the broadcasters have shown that they faced irreparable financial damage if the venture were allowed to continue, Aereo also showed it would face severe harm if the requested preliminary injunction were granted. The full injunction denial ruling can be found here."

65 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Overcoming stupidity via technicality by killfixx · 2012-07-12 00:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why is it that the only way common sense can win, in court, is through some obscure technicality?
Company X provides Service Y for free (with ads), but through an outdated or inconvenient method/medium. Company Z provides convenient access to Service Y, without changing the product, and Company X sues Company Z into oblivion.
How was Company Z's product or service hurting Company X?
Balderdash!
Other than that, good luck to Aereo.
As a side note, why don't more gadget manufacturers include tiny antennae in their products specifically for tuning in OTA TV?
Is there some massive challenge that restricts this?

--
"Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
1. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by crashumbc · 2012-07-12 00:21 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, something is missing here. My bet would the re-transmission fees. right now cable pays to re-transmit the signal. I bet Aereo is paying and broadcast TV is scared the cable companies will decide not to pay.
  The problem is the world is changing radically right now and many companies are in their death throws as their market is replaced. Broadcast TV is dead it just doesn't know it yet, same as Newspapers. What will ultimately replace them isn't clear, because the do provide a needed service of local news, its just that is about a 1/10th of what they do and get paid for now.
2. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by somersault · 2012-07-12 00:23 · Score: 1
  
  Why include a TV tuner, FM radio, etc if you can get all of that over a normal network connection? Doing things that way means that you can get TV on any of your devices, not just the ones that have been built for it, or that you've hooked up to a USB receiver or whatever. I think what they're doing sounds like a good idea. If the cable companies or networks are upset, they should look into streaming their stuff directly online via a subscriber service.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
3. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by crashumbc · 2012-07-12 00:23 · Score: 2
  
  *Aereo ISN'T paying
  --sigh I need to learn to proofread before posting on /. :(
4. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by SuricouRaven · 2012-07-12 00:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  While the ads still get viewed, X no longer has the data to prove it. No marketing data means their ad-time is worth a lot less. It's also likely to cause legal complications for content (espicially sport) which X has licensed to broadcast only in a specific geographic area. In that case, the actions of Z could cause X to be unwittingly violating their contract with the producer of that content and so exposing X to liability.
  
  If you're looking for sillyness, ask why there are so many region-specific licences still in use not only in an increasingly globalised world, but even limiting some things to specific states or local areas. Sports are the biggest culprit here by far.
5. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-07-12 00:25 · Score: 2
  
  Other than that, good luck to Aereo.
  As a side note, why don't more gadget manufacturers include tiny antennae in their products specifically for tuning in OTA TV?
  Is there some massive challenge that restricts this?
  Based on the going rate for little USB-TV dongles (ATSC or DVB-T, depending on region) on ebay(obviously a OEM wouldn't shop there; but let's pretend that pacific-rim-bottom-feeder prices on ebay are vaguely correlated to actual-BOM-cost-for-something-not-totally-dreadful with savings from mass production) of $15-$25, depending on the phase of the moon, I'd assume that it's just the technically minor; but significant, issue of price sensitivity(and, in the UK market and any others with a similar setup, BBC licensing fees).
  
  They don't seem to be cheap enough that you can throw-it-in-just-in-case(especially for customers in questionable signal areas, where external antennas, sometimes rather large, are a necessity, and just-throwing-it-in means adding an external antenna jack, and, for people who care, displays sold as TVs have them built in, basic cheap-n-nasty ATSC tuners for connecting to legacy displays are only $40-$50ish, and proper network-connected tuners like http://www.silicondust.com/ makes are certainly not free; but close to 'impulse purchase' for the target demographic.
  
  Aero's offering draws its worth from selling location to users; but for equipment being run on-premises, standalone and optional tuners are cheap enough to be accessible; but too expensive to be in the category of 'just bundle it and save them the headache'
  
  That would be my guess.
6. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 00:32 · Score: 0
  
  Cable companies (and Apple) want to end OTA broadcasts.
  They want to to stream (and pay for) everything. Yes, the
  technology is definitely there for an iPad to receive OTA signals,
  but some lame excuse is used to have you pay for it. Stupid.
  CAPTCHA = depended (really...)
7. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 00:49 · Score: 0
  
  As a side note, why don't more gadget manufacturers include tiny antennae in their products specifically for tuning in OTA TV?
  Because with the advent of HDTV/DTV signals, you actually have to include circuitry to decode the signal and that takes quite a bit more horsepower and some severe licensing fees to a few companies who hold related patents and get to operate as trolls under the digital bridge, charging everyone for access.
  Companies have latched onto the Sony model of doing business; get your patent adopted into an "industry standard", collect royalties, fuck the consumers.
8. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Joce640k · 2012-07-12 00:50 · Score: 1
  
  they should look into streaming their stuff directly online via a subscriber service.
  Pay a subscription ... for something that's freely broadcast?
  
  --
  No sig today...
9. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Joce640k · 2012-07-12 00:51 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They can prove people are watching ads on broadcast TV? How does that work...?
  
  --
  No sig today...
10. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  Only when people have specific boxes. Not that I agree with him though. I mean, i feel its probably easier to see what people are watching on a computer than on TV. Aereo probably has the capability of finding out what everybody is watching and when. More capability than cable even.
11. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by cygnwolf · 2012-07-12 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  And how exactly do they prove that it was viewed when it was broadcast over the airwaves? Television signals, even the modern digital ones, are a one way transmission with no confirmation sent back from the receiver. They have relied on metrics like Neilson ratings to determine about how many people saw the ad, and I fail to see how the source of the stream, be it from a traditional antenna or over your cable or over your internet would make a difference to the Neilson Company.
  
  --
  Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
12. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by gl4ss · 2012-07-12 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  and the point is that the broadcast separation by region is going to be dead sooner or later.
  I could rent a box in n.y.c and do this for myself legally - so why couldn't I rent it from aereo? I could also view the signal as far as it broadcasts.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
13. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by SuricouRaven · 2012-07-12 01:22 · Score: 2
  
  Sampling. That's what Neilson does. They have boxes attached to TVs in a number of volunteer households, and calculate from that sample approximate national figures. Cable decoders can also report back what channels they have been tuned to at which times. You don't need every TV monitored, just enough that you can estimate with a reasonable margin of error the larger viewership. An unauthorised stream isn't viewed on a TV, so it isn't going to count on either metric, and even if the ads were viewed they can't be so targetted - there is no point in advertising a local business on an internet stream when almost all the viewers will be in other cities.
14. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by FullCircle · 2012-07-12 01:25 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The broadcasters are probably terrified because their marketing data is mostly speculation. They also have to attempt to control the end location of content they have licensed or else other broadcasters will sue them for stepping on their market area.
  Aereo can tell what channels are being streamed at what times and could easily ask for demographics for targeted marketing. They can also send to mobile devices and offices where broadcast TV has very little uptake. Who carries a mobile receiver?
  Streaming is potentially a huge improvement for the television market but rather than change or add to their current business model, broadcasters as a group attempt to litigate themselves into relevance.
  
  --
  If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
15. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by DaMattster · 2012-07-12 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  True, Aereo isn't paying the networks for the re-broadcast rights but they are shouldering the cost burden of the equipment, bandwidth, and software development involved which isn't inconsiderable. As long as Aereo isn't blanking out the advertisements, the networks get a much larger audience reach. It should be a win-win, symbiotic relationship. But, as noted, broadcast TV is dead and its executives are concerned about becoming redundant. Lately, I've been more interested in the Indie TV shows and podcasts available over the internet. The quality is almost better and I'm sick of supporting the major media conglomerates,
16. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by lkcl · 2012-07-12 01:29 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  As a side note, why don't more gadget manufacturers include tiny antennae in their products specifically for tuning in OTA TV?
  in china, the broadcast transmission signal strengths are so high that you can pick up a good signal with a bit of wet string (literally, not figuratively).
  however in the west the signal strengths are much much lower, and whilst attempts have been made to create digital receivers that are sensitive enough, they are either far too power-hungry or far too expensive. each of these things is incompatible with portable hand-held mass-volume devices.
  so this is why internet-based video transmission is so important. the signal can be sent across pre-established [semi-reliable] connections where the data rate can be tailored to the conditions. what i'm hoping is that this company will actually develop multi-level video CODECs and publish them as free software algorithms. it could happen.
17. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by DaMattster · 2012-07-12 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  My guess is that in this case it might truly be a technical limitation. It might be a limitation of the battery. Think about it: iPads and tablets have WiFi, a cellular modem, and a screen to power. Add to it a device to convert OTA TV signals and you've got a battery hog.
18. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by somersault · 2012-07-12 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  Well Areo are a subscription service. If they're "stealing" business from the cable company, then they have to do something to compete, or die. In the cable company's case, I guess it could require reducing their monthly costs. Individual channel's could look at providing a streaming service too. I'm not sure if they pay the cable companies or the cable companies pay them tbh.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
19. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 02:12 · Score: 0
  
  There is no way of proving the 'viewer' was even watching the screen or had the volume down during the ads even if they had the means over the internet either. It's easy for me to get up and go to the toilet during ad breaks (not that I watch FtA these days anyway) or to just turn the audio down because of over driven under sampled crapvertisements. If they could get this data then obviously my privacy is not what I thought it was.
  Anyway, it is possible to get ratings on various 'popular' tv shows via the power company (and they do provide it for a fee) and the load (pun intended) they have to bear and be prepared for. When ads come on for east enders or neighbours there is a spike in electricity; this was determined to be the kettle.
  TV is a complicated business and it goes pretty deep into forecasting that it is rather impressive and scary.
  DATA OTAH is not so easy for Electric Co to gain a sense what is being watched because your computer may be on all the time or at peak when you get home, or you are using your tablet. Smart meters come into their own with this one though. It is possible to detect current draw for any type of device currently on the market and to assume data from that as we always love to do.
  Just sayin.
20. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by d3ac0n · 2012-07-12 02:18 · Score: 2
  
  --sigh I need to learn to proofread before posting on /. :(
  Yep. You and most /. posters. (myself included)
  Also, as long as we are on the topic, its "death THROES" not "death throws".
  The first means you are dying. The second implies you are playing a game of catch with the Grim Reaper.
  
  --
  Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
21. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by bws111 · 2012-07-12 02:23 · Score: 2
  
  Seeing how many computers are streaming something does not tell you how many people are watching that stream, what their ages are, what their income bracket is, etc. The current ratings system provides that information, which is way more important to advertisers then how many devices are receiving a broadcast.
22. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 02:26 · Score: 0
  
  What I forgot to mention was this:
  Internet ads are a different 'kettle' of fish. Advertising is very target marketed. If you change the demographic to online, chances are it could be a younger audience (just a guess), and this changes how you would target your ads because with the internet, you can.
  I believe this would hurt the revenue of the advertisers because a potential medium is being exploited by another medium which in turn will see a decline in the former owner of the content; true to progression in tech.
  Either way, it's the fault of Aereo 100% here as they are trying to exploit this fact for their 'own' gains; I have no proof, just stating my opinion. It may not seem apparent, but surely market data exists at Aereo and it does not belong to them. Period.
23. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by drinkypoo · 2012-07-12 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  Makes me wonder if you could reasonably use SDR for both WiFi and DVB, or something like that.
  I know you need multiple antennae and filters and such, and you would only be able to do one at a time, but that's not a horrible restriction for a tablet
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
24. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by bws111 · 2012-07-12 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  'You' are not a Neilsen family, so 'your' privacy is not being invaded. Neilsen families do consent to be monitored in that way.
25. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by d3ac0n · 2012-07-12 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, getting sampling from Aereo would be even easier to get sampling from.
  All they need to do is update the client app with a bit of data reporting on ads viewed, collect that info and send it back to the broadcasters.
  It's not as though that's an unheard-of thing in today's world. In-game ads have been doing that for several years now, and they have a MUCH tougher row to hoe in determining if ads are being viewed and for how long. (have to calculate player "view" position in the game world, etc.)
  If losing the rating count is the ONLY "damage" complaint that the broadcasters have, Aereo can easily comply with their need for ratings info.
  
  --
  Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
26. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 02:44 · Score: 0
  
  but, with the ruling in the uk about reselling software, which is protected by the first sale doctrine, couldn't the same principal apply here? they are giving the broadcast away for free, that would be where the control of distribution rights would end wouldn't it?
27. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by TheRaven64 · 2012-07-12 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  There's also the localisation issue. What TV standard do you support? Presumably something digital, but is that DVB-t, used in most of the world, ASTC, used in North America, ISDB-T, used in most of South America, or DTMB, used in China? Do you include support for all of them? And then when you sell in a country like the UK that has a TV license, you effectively tack that onto the price tag if the person doesn't already have a TV.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
28. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 02:48 · Score: 0
  
  hence 'obviously'
  add a 'woosh' as well.
29. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by bws111 · 2012-07-12 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  The woosh is all yours. Nobody cares if you, individually, saw an ad or not. They care about the average, as collected from a sample population known as 'Nielsen families'. And for that sample population, they DO know if you had the volume down or not, and if you were in the room or not, during a commercial.
30. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by hawguy · 2012-07-12 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  and the point is that the broadcast separation by region is going to be dead sooner or later.
  I could rent a box in n.y.c and do this for myself legally - so why couldn't I rent it from aereo? I could also view the signal as far as it broadcasts.
  The broadcasters are going after Aereo because Aereo takes away much of the friction. If you want to rent a box in NYC yourself, you have to find a friend who is willing to set up and host the box and let you use his internet connection... and when his cat knocks the box off the table during your favorite show, you have to wait until he comes home to plug it back in. Some people may do this, but few do.
  Aereo takes care of setting up and supporting the "box" for you -- and for thousands of others.
31. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Comen · 2012-07-12 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  I was amazed the first time I found out that local cable companies pay to rebroadcast a local station over the cable system, to me it seemed like a win/win and no one would need to pay anyone. If anything you would think the cable company is helping get the station to more people and that creates more customers watching comercials. I think many cable companies do insert their own comercials thou, but only in some places, so I can understand paying for that. It sounds like Aereo is just wanting to make money getting a broadcast to someone outside a certain area, you would not think they would have to pay anything to the broadcast provider, but some people jsut do not like the idea of anyone else making moeny off something they feel like tehy created I guess.
32. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-07-12 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  Probably easier now that(most of the world's) TV spits out a reasonably well characterized digital video streams once the messy RF bit is taken care of; but I'd still be surprised to see much in the way of savings from a standard wifi chip and a dedicated TV receiver. It might at least help deal with the zillion different slightly different regional/national standards in broadcasting. Probably wouldn't overcome the 'the apathetic won't care, and the enthusiastic will just buy slingboxes' issue, though.
33. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by knigitz · 2012-07-12 04:35 · Score: 0
  
  Who said major U.S. broadcasters are providing free services? And where can I sign up? Without Company X having it's own unique subscriber base paying for Service Y, how will Company X maintain a profitable business in order to keep providing Service Y to an ever-expanding amount of subscribers? Company X surely has no visibility of Company Z's interactions, so they would lose profit in multiple ways: 1- Subscriber's who discontinue services with Company X to move to the free internet option that Company Z offers, and 2- Not being able to claim advertisement revenue that occurs over Company Z's replicated services. Ads are being seen, but you can't bill for what you can't see occurring. Company Z is in the wrong because they do not have proper licensing to distribute this information (assumption) and this will be taken care of in court. The ruling suggests that a common sense Judge can appreciate that, however likely Company Z is to lose the battle, that judgement has not passed yet. Innocent until proven guilty. As much as I'd hate to say it, without proper licensing Company Z will not win this battle. Another victory for the major U.S. broadcasters. But hopefully this, and further disruptive services, will force the major U.S. broadcasters into reducing rates or improving their services to maintain their subscriber bases.
34. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 05:38 · Score: 0
  
  From what I can tell, they are using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Streaming_Server
  It's Apple's open source RTSP server. The CODECS are probably all h.264/aac.
35. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 06:43 · Score: 0
  
  Wrong thread dude, the response was to cygnwolf. Get back on track, duh.
36. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 07:56 · Score: 0
  
  It provides a pretty poor approximation of what is happening.
37. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by denmarkw00t · 2012-07-12 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  (myself included)
  Also, as long as we're on the topic, it's "IT'S," not "its."
  (missing an apostrofee)
38. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 08:59 · Score: 0
  
  Also, as long as we're on the topic, it's "apostrophe." :)
39. Re:Overcoming stupidity via technicality by Xzevious · 2012-07-13 08:57 · Score: 1
  
  Continuing on... It's "apostrophe"
Idiots abound! by DaMattster · 2012-07-12 01:24 · Score: 1

How incredibly shortsighted of the broadcast networks! If Aereo wants to re-broadcast these stations over the internet, there is a strong potential advertising reach and it costs the networks absolutely nothing. NBC, CBS, FOX, et al could actually charge more money for advertising. The cost burden for doing this is solely on Aereo. I guess the human race is steadily becoming more and more stupid.
1. Re:Idiots abound! by bws111 · 2012-07-12 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  Except that their ad rates are based on Neilsen ratings, which are obtained by using a special box to see what channel people are watching. If people are using this service, the ratings go down, not up, and ad rates fall with them. To counteract that you need a way to determine streaming viewership that is trusted by both the ad sellers and the advertisers, and their isn't one yet.
2. Re:Idiots abound! by Maximum+Prophet · 2012-07-12 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  It's a control and fear issue.
  
  What happens when Aereo becomes the dominant method for customers getting "OTA" signals? Then Aereo is in the position in dictating terms to the networks. Aereo could blead the them dry. Yes, that would also kill Aereo, but since NBC, CBS, ABC and FOX would kill the golden goose if they could, they assume that Aereo would as well.
  
  If your supplier would kill you if he could, then you must kill him before he can kill you. (If you can) Yes, killing your supplier kills you, but whoever dies last, wins. (:-(
  
  --
  All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
3. Re:Idiots abound! by d3ac0n · 2012-07-12 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  So decouple the rates from the ratings. Nielsen has been irrelevant for ages anyway. If you MUST use ratings, just use average rating by time slot. It's not THAT hard.
  
  --
  Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
4. Re:Idiots abound! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 02:28 · Score: 0
  
  Talk out of your a$$ much? Well, At least I know you're not a grammar nazi.
  Ever been a Nielsen viewer? I thought not.
  I have, two months ago and once with Arbitron back in college. The paper diaries they send are filled out by hand, and they ask you to include a copy of your printed channel guide so you don't have to fill out several hundred channels worth of info.
5. Re:Idiots abound! by bws111 · 2012-07-12 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  I guess Neilsen is lying on this page then when they state:
  How We Do It
  Panels
  Electronic metering technology is at the heart of the Nielsen ratings process. Our tools capture not only what channel is being watched, but also who is watching and when, including “time-shifted” viewing.
  Nielsen’s TV families represent a cross-section of representative homes throughout the U.S. Their viewing is measured by our TV meters and Local People Meters which capture information on what’s being viewed and when and, in the major U.S. markets, specifically who and how many are watching. Additionally, we collect more than two million paper diaries from across the country each year during “sweeps.”
  Census
  Using data from set top boxes, Nielsen delivers a constant, real-time stream of information, revealing tuning behavior during programs and commercials. We can tell clients which commercials are being watched and which have the strongest engagement and impact. We even analyze which position in the program or commercial block is most effective for a specific brand.
6. Re:Idiots abound! by bws111 · 2012-07-12 02:42 · Score: 1
  
  What a brilliant idea! Just charge by time slot! Hey, we can have 'dead air' (except for ads) from 9-10PM and charge the same rate for ads as the channel that is running the number 1 show! And advertisers will willingly pay that rate!
7. Re:Idiots abound! by PPH · 2012-07-12 02:54 · Score: 1
  
  To counteract that you need a way to determine streaming viewership that is trusted by both the ad sellers and the advertisers, and their isn't one yet.
  A trivially simple problem to fix. Technically, that is.
  Since Neilsen boxes are installed on consumer TV sets on a voluntary basis, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to create a Neilsen s/w package to log and report streaming views. And install that on select customers' Internet enabled viewing devices.
  But from a territorial point of view, that puts them square in the middle of Google (Apple, Microsoft and others) business models. I wouldn't be surprised if Neilsen, advertisers, content providers and other involved parties all have groups within their organization who are on the payroll of the various s/w concerns and whos job it is to bugger up any deals that don't steer the business to their sponsors.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
8. Re:Idiots abound! by d3ac0n · 2012-07-12 03:26 · Score: 2
  
  They do. It's called "Infomercials".
  
  --
  Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
9. Re:Idiots abound! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 03:43 · Score: 0
  
  Less "lying" and more "out of date".
  When I was a kid we got a Neilsen box (which I thought was the most awesome thing evar, getting to tell everyone what was cool to watch). We sent it back because it couldn't plug it into the DirecTV satellite (back when they called it DSS), so they sent us a booklet to fill in by hand with what each of us watched. I suspect that they don't even try to use the boxes anymore. Back then, cable wasn't digital and didn't require poorly supported cablecard gear to access the cable line.
10. Re:Idiots abound! by bws111 · 2012-07-12 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, but that model only works when there is a single sponsor for a show, and the sponsor is solely responsible for the content of the show. With the exception of infomercials, that model has not been used in TV for a very long time, and it seems very unlikely to me that there are very many advertisers who want to be in the TV program production business.
  As soon as you move to a model where the advertiser is just 'buying time' during a show, the ratings of that show are the only thing that matter.
11. Re:Idiots abound! by bws111 · 2012-07-12 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  Out of date?? This isn't some Wikipedia article or something, it is Nielsen's own description of what they do, linked to directly from their home page. And they even reference getting data from people watching TV on mobile phones, so it can't be too far out of date.
  It says right on that page that they use paper diaries - only during sweeps week when they want to get a whole lot more data.
(Insert witty attractant here.) by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-07-12 02:38 · Score: 1

As long as they act like a fancy antenna for stuff you are in range of anyway, and don't mess with the signal like offering ad skipping, what's the problem?

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
If you meet your supplier in the road... by Chibi+Merrow · 2012-07-12 02:41 · Score: 1

kill him?

--
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Wait how are broadcasters hurt? by DarkOx · 2012-07-12 02:55 · Score: 2

Last I checked the business model was broadcasters license content to get people to watch and then get paid by advertisers to show commercials during the that content. Advertisers pay more based on the expected number of eyeballs and demographic.
If anything Aereo adds to the number of viewers, I am assuming the don't scrape the commercials out of the broadcast so I would think this would make the advertisers happy! If anything it should increase the stations revenue.

--
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
1. Re:Wait how are broadcasters hurt? by bws111 · 2012-07-12 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  Of course it makes the advertisers happy, they are getting free ads. It is the people selling the ads that are not happy, because if anyone is free to retransmit their broadcast they have no way of knowing (and more importantly, 'proving') how many people are seeing the ads.
2. Re:Wait how are broadcasters hurt? by Belteshazzar · 2012-07-12 04:39 · Score: 0
  
  One way this hurts broadcasters is that this product would remove the geographical boundaries of terrestrial broadcasts. Broadcasters use these boundaries to control who gets to see/hear certain content licensed only to certain geographical areas. (ie: you can only watch/hear your favorite local sports team via local radio and TV while others outside the market would have to use other non-free methods to get the game)
  Radio stations are already forced to black out audio of professional sports games on their web streams. I doubt this device currently supports this feature and could therefore threaten content providers geographic control.
3. Re:Wait how are broadcasters hurt? by DarkOx · 2012-07-12 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  They don't know that anyway they have some dubious statistics purchased from another party based on questionnaire with much to small a sample size.
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
4. Re:Wait how are broadcasters hurt? by bws111 · 2012-07-12 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't matter if the statistics are 'dubious' or not, they are accepted. Now, if you can convince the advertisers that they should pay more because you think that other services are retransmitting their ads, so obviously that is a benefit to them, go for it.
iCraveTV by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 02:58 · Score: 0

I thought that this was illegal in America. That was the basis for Americans somehow managing to ruin the Canadian iCraveTV company.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICraveTV
The Mothership is Calling... by Frosty+Piss · 2012-07-12 03:37 · Score: 1

One day soon, the set-top box or the TV itself will sense and communicate the proximity and number of viewers back to the Mothership. It will not be possible to disable this "feature", either with manual controls / software, or taping over a sensor... Opening up the TV / box and physically disabling the feature will brick your account... Didn't you read the contract and TOS you signed?

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
It's a simple rule... by rastoboy29 · 2012-07-12 08:47 · Score: 2

I think it should be a rule of thumb that, if you put something out in public--via broadcast or the internet--it is now public. ie. you can't treat it as if it's some kind of proprietary thing. Exactly how that would work might be open to some interpretation, but I just think pretending it's still under your control when you put it in public is just retarded.

--
expandfairuse.org
No aereola jokes? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-12 09:46 · Score: 0

Come on people... I'm looking at you, -1 posters