 TomekPremium
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY | reply to Linklist
Re: It will be an easy, but expensive win for Aereo I think you didn't look into much detail of how infrastructure is build.
Each customer get's their OWN antenna. and they are individually fed to servers which individually process the streams. I seen their datacenter, it is HUGE. To do what you say they would require them to have 1/10 of the hardware as they would "share" among subscribers.
I seen similar method used in different countries, where international re-broadcasing was illegal. So that company set up on-site receivers either via coax or satellite and then had converters to IPTV. So customer was paying for subscription in foreign country plus delivery mechanism.
--
Semper Fi |
|
|
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by Tomek:Each customer get's their OWN antenna. and they are individually fed to servers which individually process the streams. .
Did you read where each antenna is 1/4 of an inch. Do you REALLY believe each 1/4" antenna is going to pick up all the OTA broadcasts in the area? These tiny antennas are a fraud and the OTA broadcasts would be picked up by conventional antennas or by aggregating all the tiny antennas together to get the signals. If either method is used, then the claim that each user has their own personal antenna is a massive lie and is a legal fiction to get around copyright law.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/
|
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | said by Linklist:Did you read where each antenna is 1/4 of an inch. Do you REALLY believe each 1/4" antenna is going to pick up all the OTA broadcasts in the area? These tiny antennas are a fraud and the OTA broadcasts would be picked up by conventional antennas or by aggregating all the tiny antennas together to get the signals. If either method is used, then the claim that each user has their own personal antenna is a massive lie and is a legal fiction to get around copyright law.
Sooo..... maybe just go look for yourself instead of assuming? Plenty of people throughout the ages of man have said, "That's just not possible.", and have been dead wrong. |
|
| reply to Linklist
I just used an online antenna calculator, and for UHF TV stations, it would require antennae between 2 31/32in. and 1 19/32in. to cover the approximate UHF broadcasting range of 470 MHz to 890 MHz, at least for 1/8 wavelength antennae (the smallest the calculator would do).
I'm not very learned on radio transmission, but they would need something around 1/32 wavelength to get down to 1/4 in. antennae. If that would still pick up a signal, they could just have the antennae very close to the source transmission so that they would not require very much gain. |
|
TomekPremium
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY | reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:said by Tomek:Each customer get's their OWN antenna. and they are individually fed to servers which individually process the streams. .
Did you read where each antenna is 1/4 of an inch. Do you REALLY believe each 1/4" antenna is going to pick up all the OTA broadcasts in the area? These tiny antennas are a fraud and the OTA broadcasts would be picked up by conventional antennas or by aggregating all the tiny antennas together to get the signals. If either method is used, then the claim that each user has their own personal antenna is a massive lie and is a legal fiction to get around copyright law. I seen in person, I been in that datacenter. They choose location in brooklyn with large windows facing Empire State building. They have direct line of sight to the emitters. So what makes you think that you need crazy antenna to pick it up? Do you have electrical engineering degree to back it what you THINK? Location, location, location.
--
Semper Fi |
|
Reviews:
 ·Mediacom
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Tomek
said by Tomek:I think you didn't look into much detail of how infrastructure is build.
Each customer get's their OWN antenna. and they are individually fed to servers which individually process the streams. I seen their datacenter, it is HUGE. To do what you say they would require them to have 1/10 of the hardware as they would "share" among subscribers.
I seen similar method used in different countries, where international re-broadcasing was illegal. So that company set up on-site receivers either via coax or satellite and then had converters to IPTV. So customer was paying for subscription in foreign country plus delivery mechanism.
Interesting. When you say "servers which individually process the streams..." are the servers themselves shared and multitasking among the users? What about the networking and storage, how shared are they?
I don't know if it would really make a difference, they are still going one step beyond SlingBox. Slingbox is a one time purchase that allows users to literally own the gear to placeshift using their own network infrastructure in their home. Aereo is a service-for-fee that interposes Aereo-owned hardware between the end user and the broadcast station. Slingbox legal, Aereo very doubtful. IMO.
But, you have brought some interesting facts to the discussion and I would like to hear more!!! |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | If place shifting is an acceptable practice, then we are talking symantics about paying for a device versus paying for a service. The function is the same, as long as the company can guarantee that customers do not get channels which they are not supposed to get. But that's why they feel it is justified enough to go to court over. |
|
TomekPremium
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY | reply to MyDogHsFleas
Isn't Time Warner doing just that with Remote DVR? They won the test case and user content appears to be in a "cloud"
--
Semper Fi |
|
Reviews:
·Mediacom
·RoadRunner Cable
| It's Cablevision, not Time Warner.
I think the difference is that Cablevision has actually licensed the content with the carriers, which Aereo has not. Cablevision's case is around whether their licensing agreement covers the remote DVR use case. Aereo's case is around whether they are allowed to capture and relay OTA broadcasts to their users, WITHOUT a license from the broadcasters. Quite a different legal question, I think.
I don't really have much of an opinion one way or the other around the remote DVR question. Here is a good article on it. Seems like it's settled, and was a fairly narrow decision. |
|
Reviews:
·Mediacom
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to wentlanc
said by wentlanc:If place shifting is an acceptable practice, then we are talking symantics about paying for a device versus paying for a service.
Within those "symantics" lies a giant industry of very smart people who all went to law school and who are all being paid a ton of money to deal with the questions that you blithely wave off as simply answered. Not to mention the lobbyists and the politicians. 
I like to understand the details and look at the actual status of what's really been decided and what's up for decision. I find that much more interesting. |
|
