Slashdot Mirror
Aereo Embraces Ruling, Tries To Re-Classify Itself As Cable Company
An anonymous reader writes Rather than completely shuttering its TV-over-the-internet business, Aereo has decided to embrace the Supreme Court's recent decision against it. In a letter to the lower court overseeing the litigation between the company and network broadcasters, Aereo asks to be considered a cable company and to be allowed to pay royalties as such. Cable companies pay royalties to obtain a copyright statutory license under the Copyright Act to retransmit over-the-air programming, and the royalties are set by the government, not the broadcasters. The broadcasters are not happy with this move, of course, claiming that Aereo should not be allowed to flip-flop on how it defines itself.
Aereo to broadcasters: "quack".
So a simplified summary of the issue is:
Aereo: We're not a cable company, we don't have to pay royalties.
Networks: Yes you are, you have to pay us
Aereo: No we aren't. Sue us.
Networks: Ok
Lower Courts:You're like a cable company.
Aereo: Are you sure?
SCOTUS: Yes.
Aereo: Crap. We'll be a cable company and pay the royalties then.
Networks: You're not a cable company
Aereo: C'mon man!
Companies: Hey Courts, Aero is a cable company!
Aero: We really aren't.
Courts: I agree with the Companies. Aero is a cable company.
Aero: Sigh, I guess we'll have to become a cable company then.
Companies: I Object! Aero isn't a cable company!
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
What the hell they are complaining about now? If court ruled that how Aereo previously defined itself was illegal, then obviously it has to change it. First they win now they complain about it?
As best I can tell, they are whining because they preferred the imaginary world where the lawsuit against Aereo was actually over whether the filthy, disruptive, upstarts shoudl be burned to the ground and have the earth beneath them salted, rather than whether they were more like an antenna rental service or more like a cable company.
Aereo obviously didn't want to be a cable company, hence its ongoing defense; but the tone of the rhetoric against them was never "Yeah, because of a raft of tedious reasons, Aereo ought to be classified as a cable company for regulatory purposes"; but rather a bunch of fire and brimstone nonsense about the signal-stealing piratepocalypse.
If they are considered a cable company, then they won't need all those antennas. That should reduce their operating cost, and maybe offset some of the new re-transmission costs.
They can end free OTA broadcasting... they just need to give the wireless spectrum back to the US Government. Not going to happen.
As I understand it, if they get classified as a cable company Aero will be legally allowed to put their own ads into the stream, overwriting the ads the original broadcaster put in there or maybe removing them entirely if they still want to be an entirely subscription driven service. They could really seriously piss off some OTA broadcasters with this approach.
I read the internet for the articles.
Unsurprisingly you do not make up 100% of cable operator revenue. In fact you make up approximately 0% and hence your particular preferences mean exactly diddly squat to their decision on how to value the sports stations that drive a large portion of their revenue.
You can still sit comfortable in your knowledge of your superiority to the people who do enjoy watching sports, of course.