If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   Help, an innovative tech company is challenging TV broadcasters failed business model. To the LawyerMobile   (wired.com) divider line 56
    More: Obvious, Fox Broadcasting, irreparable damage or injury, Barry Diller, proprietary software, petitioners, Cablevision, VCR, RealNetworks Inc.  
•       •       •

5263 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 Apr 2012 at 9:25 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-13 09:38:04 AM  
This company is in trouble for providing a service the broadcasters should wake up and do themselves.
 
2012-04-13 09:42:25 AM  
I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.
 
2012-04-13 09:49:21 AM  
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
 
Boe
2012-04-13 09:53:03 AM  
"analyst Vijay Jayant"

That sounds like a troll name if ever there was one. LOL
 
2012-04-13 09:53:51 AM  

GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.


I dunno, that's the only broadcasts I get. Cable just doesn't seem worth it for football season (I'm a homer, so there's only one game I really really need to watch, and then I'm happy watching anything else).
 
2012-04-13 10:00:14 AM  
Oh, look. More people who want to stuff the tech genie back into the bottle because they dont want to modify their outdated business model.

Adapt or die.
 
2012-04-13 10:01:04 AM  
IP laws, always looking out for you! (you being huge companies)

No way Aereo wins. This is clearly a violation of laws created to protect huge telecom companies.
 
2012-04-13 10:01:28 AM  
Wait. It's a service that takes an otherwise free signal and allows it to be played on a computer?

How is this different from a TV tuner card for a regular PC?
 
2012-04-13 10:03:18 AM  

t3knomanser: GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.

I dunno, that's the only broadcasts I get. Cable just doesn't seem worth it for football season (I'm a homer, so there's only one game I really really need to watch, and then I'm happy watching anything else).


Local broadcast seems to be getting more local. There seems to be less of a tendency to purchase nationally syndicated programming, and more of an effort to generate local programming.

Could just be a Seattle thing.
 
2012-04-13 10:06:50 AM  
You mean to tell me that Hollywood is using the system designed to promote innovation to kill innovation?

Jesus, that's like putting the Boston Strangler near a woman home alone!
 
2012-04-13 10:09:57 AM  

GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.


I bought a $30 digital antenna 3 years ago, and haven't paid for cable since.

t3knomanser: GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.

I dunno, that's the only broadcasts I get. Cable just doesn't seem worth it for football season (I'm a homer, so there's only one game I really really need to watch, and then I'm happy watching anything else).


Agreed; I get the local games, and primetime shows. For all else, I just hook my computer up to my TV and watch Hulu/Netflix/Fark

Who the hell wants to pay for cable?

//Admittedly, I do find alternate ways to watch Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, etc.
 
2012-04-13 10:18:38 AM  
People still watch television? I thought FARK had replaced television.
 
M-G
2012-04-13 10:19:46 AM  

Cinaed: Wait. It's a service that takes an otherwise free signal and allows it to be played on a computer?

How is this different from a TV tuner card for a regular PC?


The courts have pretty clearly decided that you, as a consumer, can do quite a bit under fair use. But here is a third party making (well, charging) money and not giving any of it to the broadcasters, so they're releasing the hounds.
 
2012-04-13 10:19:58 AM  

Cinaed: Wait. It's a service that takes an otherwise free signal and allows it to be played on a computer?

How is this different from a TV tuner card for a regular PC?


Non-nerds will have access to this in massive numbers. Yes, I know that anyone could get a tv tuner card before, but this ups the laziness factor up to the point no one can resist. Just like mp3 players didn't exist before the iPod.
 
2012-04-13 10:21:13 AM  

Cinaed: Wait. It's a service that takes an otherwise free signal and allows it to be played on a computer?

How is this different from a TV tuner card for a regular PC?


A TV tuner card receives the signal from the original broadcaster. Aereo rebroadcasts.
Personally, I don't see what the problem is, but then again I'm not an out of touch network exec who lacks the ability to see what's been right in front of me for years and find a way to adapt my business to take advantage of it.
 
2012-04-13 10:43:39 AM  
I would give more of a damn if there was anything on TV I was willing to pay to see.

Fano

Non-nerds will have access to this in massive numbers. Yes, I know that anyone could get a tv tuner card before, but this ups the laziness factor up to the point no one can resist. Just like mp3 players didn't exist before the iPod.

The RCA Lyra came out at least two years before the iPod.

/had one of those POSs.

//never had an iAnything.
 
2012-04-13 10:46:41 AM  

SmellsLikePoo: Who the hell wants to pay for cable?

//Admittedly, I do find alternate ways to watch Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, etc.


Come NHL playoffs, I start to get tempted. But then there are various alternative streams that I can use.
 
2012-04-13 10:49:56 AM  

studebaker hoch: Fano

Non-nerds will have access to this in massive numbers. Yes, I know that anyone could get a tv tuner card before, but this ups the laziness factor up to the point no one can resist. Just like mp3 players didn't exist before the iPod.

The RCA Lyra came out at least two years before the iPod.

/had one of those POSs.

//never had an iAnything.


*whoooosh*
 
2012-04-13 10:53:55 AM  

Cinaed: Wait. It's a service that takes an otherwise free signal and allows it to be played on a computer?

How is this different from a TV tuner card for a regular PC?


With a PC Tuner card you need to be able to receive the signal.
What this does is allow a person who might not otherwise be able to get a signal locally to use a remote receiver and then pipe it to their PC via the 'Net.

This would be a great service in rural areas now that TV bandwidth is in the HD range and HD does not carry far. There are huge areas of the US that are no longer served by 'local TV'. Now they have to add local channels to an existing Cable/Sat. service. That is right, no get local 'free' channels you have to subscribe to a larger service then ADD local programming.

These crazy folks in the article are trying to give you local channels WITHOUT requiring one of the big cable/sat providers. HEATHENS!
 
2012-04-13 10:57:40 AM  

BHShaman: What this does is allow a person who might not otherwise be able to get a signal locally to use a remote receiver and then pipe it to their PC via the 'Net.


Well, they're only offering the service to users in NYC- people in the original broadcast area. So their real crime is letting iPads watch TV.
 
2012-04-13 11:00:15 AM  
This sounds very similar to a service in Japan that sadly, got shut down by the courts.

I believe the Japanese service was cable based - the company had offices full of cable connections (each individually paid for and registered to the customer), the associated cable box, and a converter to digitize the signal and send it to wherever the hell the customer actually was. It was used by Japanese people overseas to watch their terrible, terrible local TV.

By all sane logic, everything is above board, but no, courts killed it.
 
2012-04-13 11:02:09 AM  

t3knomanser:
Well, they're only offering the service to users in NYC- people in the original broadcast area. So their real crime is letting iPads watch TV.


Have to pilot somewhere.
Where I live I am in an area that used to be served by 2 regional news areas that overlapped.
I could choose between 2 sets of news teams for every broadcast channel.
After HD signal, I now get none.

I'm sure someone still list my home as in their broadcast area, but that does not mean I can actually receive a signal that can be processed.

Wife can not LIVE without local channels. I know, I married a Luddite.
Tempted to get this service and then cancel the Sat. service.
Kids and I watch almost everything off the 'Net.
 
2012-04-13 11:02:53 AM  
How is this different from the original cable TV services? If my memory is correct, didn't Cable TV get it's start when some guy rigged an antenna on top of a mountain and ran a cable down to the town in the valley below that was blocked out from the over the air signal?
 
2012-04-13 11:14:28 AM  
If they're just rebroadcasting, I don't see the issue. If they're charging people for the service, yeah, I can see the problem.

wildcardjack: This company is in trouble for providing a service the broadcasters should wake up and do themselves.


Yes, this. Or they could ask for a cut of the revenue.
 
2012-04-13 11:21:06 AM  
The only reason I can sort of side with the corps (and it makes me feel dirty) is that the Aereo company (according to the article) is just rebroadcasting corporate content, I'll assume sans commercials, will shortly make money by doing so, and is not paying anything back to the corps.

So basically the corps are producing, then giving it away free while someone turns around and sells it.

But have any of you actually been on a corporate website to attempt to watch thier shows? They're universally horrible, never have shows up they're supposed, the layout is garbage/Geocities bad, the ad saturations are over 100%. Clearly these companies don't understand the 'net, websites, or how ads work (not mechanics wise, they clearly get how to cram 400 on a page and force-view them, more...how they turn people off).
 
2012-04-13 11:22:29 AM  
I was cool until the $12 dollar part. Just stick a DTV tuner into you iPad's USB port.
/Oh wait
 
2012-04-13 11:28:10 AM  
Didn't TWC get smacked for something almost like this?
 
2012-04-13 11:28:57 AM  
But why would you name your internet rebroadcasting company "Help"?
 
2012-04-13 11:30:42 AM  

MugzyBrown: IP laws, always looking out for you! (you being huge companies)

No way Aereo wins. This is clearly a violation of laws created to protect huge telecom companies.


Strangely enough, it isn't. The two Supreme Court cases the article cites are arguably unlikely to be interpreted in favor of the plaintiffs.
 
2012-04-13 11:32:55 AM  

studebaker hoch: I would give more of a damn if there was anything on TV I was willing to pay to see.

Fano

Non-nerds will have access to this in massive numbers. Yes, I know that anyone could get a tv tuner card before, but this ups the laziness factor up to the point no one can resist. Just like mp3 players didn't exist before the iPod.

The RCA Lyra came out at least two years before the iPod.

/had one of those POSs.

//never had an iAnything.


It's vampires - right? - that will stop chasing their victim to obsessively count grains of sand or rice or whatever.

What went through your head there? Because I imagine it was, "omg, he said 'iPod'. I must now suspend all critical thought and go to the comment input box to let the world know that Apple isn't all that."
 
2012-04-13 11:38:58 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com

/You mean your Chevy?
 
2012-04-13 11:41:02 AM  

drjekel_mrhyde: I was cool until the $12 dollar part. Just stick a DTV tuner into you iPad's USB port.
/Oh wait


Yep, if they want to charge they'll have to negotiate carriage rights just like everyone else.
 
2012-04-13 11:41:53 AM  

SmellsLikePoo: GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.

I bought a $30 digital antenna 3 years ago, and haven't paid for cable since.

t3knomanser: GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.

I dunno, that's the only broadcasts I get. Cable just doesn't seem worth it for football season (I'm a homer, so there's only one game I really really need to watch, and then I'm happy watching anything else).

Agreed; I get the local games, and primetime shows. For all else, I just hook my computer up to my TV and watch Hulu/Netflix/Fark

Who the hell wants to pay for cable?

//Admittedly, I do find alternate ways to watch Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, etc.


I rent a fiostvbox in my sisters house. She has HBO.

The TV for that cablebox just happens to be 250 miles away ;)

The stream goes to a router running openvpn, the encrypted traffic is tunneled to the terminating router in my house. I dont really have to encrypt it, but the tunneling allows me to keep all the machines organized even though the IPs arent static.

I loathe slingmedia and slingbox though. Their service works, but they keep exerting more and more control over users. Recently their player SW was discontinued and soon the only access will be through their website. I wouldn't mind but they charge $30 per license to view on your phone and have encrypted the stream of your own device to force you into their walled garden. Not as bad as Tivo yet, but I know they are going to a subscription model as soon as they can pull it off.

It's dead simple to use VLC on a cheap (sub $200)PC and stream from a capture card. Then just stick a small formfactor media receiver on the back of your tv. Hell, I think an XBox works for that.

Aside: anyone have suggestions for a decent card to capture component video? Im only finding composite and coax input models. The crappy qip7100 for Fios downgrades the coax output to 480p and their firewire doesnt work on win7 64 bit.
 
2012-04-13 11:47:26 AM  

kroonermanblack: The only reason I can sort of side with the corps (and it makes me feel dirty) is that the Aereo company (according to the article) is just rebroadcasting corporate content, I'll assume sans commercials, will shortly make money by doing so, and is not paying anything back to the corps.

So basically the corps are producing, then giving it away free while someone turns around and sells it.

But have any of you actually been on a corporate website to attempt to watch thier shows? They're universally horrible, never have shows up they're supposed, the layout is garbage/Geocities bad, the ad saturations are over 100%. Clearly these companies don't understand the 'net, websites, or how ads work (not mechanics wise, they clearly get how to cram 400 on a page and force-view them, more...how they turn people off).


It preserves the commercials. Its service is nothing more than a repeater service.

The sad thing is that if these companies were smart, they would work with this repeater to get subscriber profiles. Use that info as justification to charge more for ads since they now have more verifiable viewers.
 
2012-04-13 12:52:54 PM  
kim jong-un: Aside: anyone have suggestions for a decent card to capture component video? Im only finding composite and coax input models. The crappy qip7100 for ...

I was looking into this not too long ago... it's not cheap, but it'll record component video in H.264:

Hauppauge HD PVR (new window)
 
2012-04-13 01:16:13 PM  

geek_mars: A TV tuner card receives the signal from the original broadcaster. Aereo rebroadcasts.


No, it takes a broadcast signal and retransmits it to a single point per antenna. If they were using a single antenna and retransmitting it out to a bunch of people that would be rebroadcast. It's a point to point transmission from your antenna to your computer. "Broadcast" implies that something is, well, cast broadly, which these aren't. The only difference between this and the TV tuner card is the length of the distance between the CPU and the tuner card and the protocol used between them.

This is like the location-shifting equivalent of time-shifting. If Slingbox hosting is legal, this should be as well. IMHO, it's analogous to renting a roof antenna and plugging it in to your own TV, just over an IP socket rather than with a simple wire.

I hope Hollywood eats it big on this one.
 
2012-04-13 01:40:05 PM  

Baryogenesis: If they're just rebroadcasting, I don't see the issue. If they're charging people for the service, yeah, I can see the problem.


The problem is there is already a rebroadcast system in place and this company is not playing along. You can't just grab a signal and resell it without entering into a contract with the station. Also, there are need to carry rules (if your antenna can pick it up, you need to distribute to operate your service in an area), and stations may require you to carry subchannels.

On the technical side, this idea of micro-antennas to skirt the rules is nothing more than a gimmick as stated in TFA. They are still grabbing the signal and rebroadcasting to the antennas in their datacenter, where any sane implementation would instead convert to IP.
 
2012-04-13 01:45:38 PM  

ProfessorOhki: This is like the location-shifting equivalent of time-shifting. If Slingbox hosting is legal, this should be as well.


Entirely different. With Slingbox, the consumer pulls in the signal and shoots it out unicast. It's conceptually the same as having a really long cable between the receiver and your TV. Aereo is rebroadcasting without seeking the right to do so as every other company has to do. It would be like charging many people to simultaneously access a single Slingbox.
 
2012-04-13 01:45:50 PM  

Huck Chaser: *whoooosh*


Heh, I felt the wind from it flying overhead all the way out here.
 
2012-04-13 01:58:51 PM  

1. Put snakes on plane: ProfessorOhki: This is like the location-shifting equivalent of time-shifting. If Slingbox hosting is legal, this should be as well.

Entirely different. With Slingbox, the consumer pulls in the signal and shoots it out unicast. It's conceptually the same as having a really long cable between the receiver and your TV. Aereo is rebroadcasting without seeking the right to do so as every other company has to do. It would be like charging many people to simultaneously access a single Slingbox.


Slingbox hosting. Um, did you miss the part with Aereo having dedicated equipment per-customer? The article seemed to sort of focus on that... This could (I obviously don't know the exact implementation details) be essentially same as putting 50 Slingboxes in a data center, running them of of 50 antennas and having each one of those Slingboxes unicast to a single user.

/Which has been done
//But violates Sling's ToS
///But I can't find any instances of them actually taking action against those hosts
 
2012-04-13 02:01:03 PM  

Neondistraction: The more things change, the more they stay the same.


www.filmjackets.com
 
2012-04-13 02:08:35 PM  

GoodyearPimp: I should sue someone for trying to make me believe someone wants to watch local TV broadcasts.


THIS

I hardly watch any TV now. What do I need to see? News? No, I can get that anytime I want. Weather? Same. Reality TV? Errr no.

I'll see the odd thing that I like, but mostly I'd rather just watch movies and youtube clips,read articles on the net or fap to porn.
 
2012-04-13 02:12:36 PM  

MrGuy: How is this different from the original cable TV services? If my memory is correct, didn't Cable TV get it's start when some guy rigged an antenna on top of a mountain and ran a cable down to the town in the valley below that was blocked out from the over the air signal?


Yes, in my neck of the woods. Interestingly enough, right now, on my desk I have a "cable bill" of my father's from 1954. The cost to install the equipment was $125 and then $3.50/month, to receive a "TV signal."
 
2012-04-13 02:25:52 PM  

BHShaman: This would be a great service in rural areas now that TV bandwidth is in the HD range and HD does not carry far.


One big reason why digital TV doesn't cover as many rural US and Canadian households as analog TV is because many stations abandoned their VHF-Lo (ch2-6) channels for UHF channels when they did the digital cut-over. The higher the frequency, the more line-of-sight the signal becomes and the more it gets absorbed by the atmosphere.

My understanding is that TV stations abandoned VHF-Lo because of RF noise problems in the band and because of antenna requirements (the lower the frequency, the larger the antenna).
 
2012-04-13 04:04:44 PM  

Dinjiin: many stations abandoned their VHF-Lo (ch2-6) channels for UHF channels when they did the digital cut-over.


Understood. And this REPOINTING service would be great for folks like me.
Subscribe to a company that repoints a capable receiver to my location.
Without having to force me into some base tier subscription.

I would not be paying for the rights to see the station, since it is not cable (subscription) channel.
I would be paying for the public broadcast to be piped directly to me.
 
2012-04-13 04:09:09 PM  

drjekel_mrhyde: I was cool until the $12 dollar part. Just stick a DTV tuner into you iPad's USB port.
/Oh wait


Made me think why no one has built a TV tuner for the whatchamacallit port on the IPad...
 
2012-04-13 04:53:15 PM  
Better idea: shut down all television broadcast signals and repatriate the bandwidth for a nationwide wireless network. Television stations can use HTTP streaming to spew their bile instead of wasting valuable bandwidth. Bonus--the loud mouth of big media gets drowned because everyone now has equal opportunity to be a broadcaster.
 
2012-04-13 05:14:25 PM  

mcreadyblue: drjekel_mrhyde: I was cool until the $12 dollar part. Just stick a DTV tuner into you iPad's USB port.
/Oh wait

Made me think why no one has built a TV tuner for the whatchamacallit port on the IPad...


You mean like this Link (new window)
 
2012-04-13 06:10:52 PM  

wildcardjack: This company is in trouble for providing a service the broadcasters should wake up and do themselves.


They *do* provide that service. It's called a Transmitter, and they have one. You want to watch? Put up a frigging antenna. The FCC standard for Coverage Area is based on an antenna 30 feet in the air - not a coat hanger, with foil, in your frigging basement. Grade A is "you get a signal 80% of the time with that setup". Grade B is 50%. Don't like the 1949 standards, change the law.

TV stations are a franchise. They pay $$ for exclusive rights to broadcast that network signal to that market. Letting someone else steal your signal and sell it to someone else is Theft. Ask RIAA, they'll tell you. Why do you hate Capitalism?

\grumble, dammit
 
2012-04-13 06:12:52 PM  

Dinjiin: BHShaman: This would be a great service in rural areas now that TV bandwidth is in the HD range and HD does not carry far.

One big reason why digital TV doesn't cover as many rural US and Canadian households as analog TV is because many stations abandoned their VHF-Lo (ch2-6) channels for UHF channels when they did the digital cut-over. The higher the frequency, the more line-of-sight the signal becomes and the more it gets absorbed by the atmosphere.

My understanding is that TV stations abandoned VHF-Lo because of RF noise problems in the band and because of antenna requirements (the lower the frequency, the larger the antenna).


VHF mid has some weird propagation problems, and doesn't carry *near* as well as we were promised. Plenty of us spend serious dollars converting mid VHF channels to digital only to find it doesn't carry for &&%$#.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report