Am I the only one thinking that even the MPAA realizes their case has everything to do with iCraveTV selling surrogate advertising? What case would the MPAA have against someone rebroadcasting network TV as long as the network's own commercials were also being rebroacast. Now that might be an interesting case... But as it stands, iCraveTV should have negotiated with the networks to share some of the ad profits from the side banners and should not have preempted network commercials in any way. There are no issues here, IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
Am I the only one thinking that even the MPAA realizes their case has everything to do with iCraveTV selling surrogate advertising? What case would the MPAA have against someone rebroadcasting network TV as long as the network's own commercials were also being rebroacast. Now that might be an interesting case... But as it stands, iCraveTV should have negotiated with the networks to share some of the ad profits from the side banners and should not have preempted network commercials in any way. There are no issues here, IMO.
WOW