Thoughtful, detailed coverage of the Mac, iPhone, and iPad, plus the TidBITS Content Network for Apple consultants.



Pick an apple! 


Related Articles



Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo

In a 6–3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of broadcasters in their case against Aereo, the broadcast TV streaming service based around renting individual antennas for $8 per month. The court found that Aereo’s service violates the Copyright Act by playing recordings of broadcast content. While Aereo could conceivably bounce back, CEO Chet Kanojia said before the ruling, “If it’s a total straight-up loss, then it’s dead. We’re done.” In a formal response to the ruling, Kanojia said, “We are disappointed in the outcome, but our work is not done. We will continue to fight for our consumers and fight to create innovative technologies that have a meaningful and positive impact on our world.”favicon follow link


Comments about Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo
(Comments are closed.)

Steven Oz  An apple icon for a TidBITS Contributor 2014-06-25 17:13
As an NYC Aereo subscriber, I'm very disappointed. But as some have said, if Aereo must contribute to the broadcasters, then allow us to choose the stations we watch and pay. I only watch local news at 11pm on CBS and various current PBS evening programs. And I have a Roku and an Apple TV, so I have more good TV, on demand, than I could ever watch. I'll pay a few cents more for Channel 2 and 13, and I won't lose sleep about dumping the rest.
This is dumb because anyone can buy an antenna and watch these channels free. This is exactly what Aereo was offering. The service you paid for was their DVR ability and being able to stream it to your Roku or other set top box.

It was clear that the judges were clueless about anything except money. And the fact that the broadcasters said they would pull their programing from the free airwaves is probably against their FCC license. But in the end money wins.

I'm in the NYC area and I do get to watch PBS on my Roku via their Roku channel, but it would have been nice to be able to watch live TV every so often without having to get an antenna.

The other dumb thing is how these networks let you watch on set top boxes or your phone, but only if you have a cable subscription. If I had cable I wouldn't need that ability!

The real problem is the cable monopoly.
Steven Oz  An apple icon for a TidBITS Contributor 2014-06-28 15:35
We're both in NYC, but I live in Manhattan, in a building that faces west towards NJ, in a courtyard, and I get nothing in my apartment from an antenna. I've tried with good antennas. So I _need_ cable or Aereo to get local stations. Aereo gave me as good a picture as cable, and much cheaper. I wish Aereo, and its successors, well.

BTW, I really don't understand why the Supreme Court liberals voted against it. Aereo was a long distance personal antenna with DVR. Luckily, it's such good technology I think it's just a matter of time before something like it is back.

(And, as I said in my other post, I mostly just want to watch 30 minutes of the evening local news. PBS is on Apple TV and Roku, so I don't even need cable for that, except that it's not live on those boxes.)