bhorow
join:2004-05-17
Forest Hills, NY
| Re-Broadcast ETC
The law regarding retransmission is really clear. If you ever listen to a baseball game they tell you that its illegal to do that...Its the disclaimer that announcers all love to say.
Time Warner has gotten consent from those companies that wish to do this and its not really DVR service as much as it is starting over if you miss part of a show.
This will probably go to a court even maybe the supreme court. Cablevision is doing this without consent of the content providers, therefore as i look at it , its inherently illegal.
I'm not so certain how much Time Warner wishes to pursue the lawsuit. I think that its just a function of testing to see where the courts position is on this matter.
I just can't see how Cablevision winning a case here, since this flies in the face of rebroadcasting.
Time Warner and other content providers have a lot to loose in this case. However, I think that the law suit, is a mere method of testing the current laws to see what a broadcaster can do. |
|
ITGuy72
Permanently Disco
Premium
join:2001-11-01
New York
| said by bhorow  :Time Warner and other content providers have a lot to loose in this case. However, I think that the law suit, is a mere method of testing the current laws to see what a broadcaster can do. That's why this lawsuit will go on for YEARS and YEARS! |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2
| reply to bhorow
ah, but what about the fact that the consumers who whould likely have access to this would have paid for access to watch it at the time of orginal broadcast?
I find it hard to believe that cablevision would be giving away access to these shows for free. Access would likely be granted to people who have already PAID for the channel, thereby making it a simple time shift which has already been deemed legal. |
|
ITGuy72
Permanently Disco
Premium
join:2001-11-01
New York
| said by backness :I find it hard to believe that cablevision would be giving away access to these shows for free. They're not, that's the point of their stance in this. The networks however claim foul play because in effect they are perceiving them to re-broadcast content across the network without their consent, paid for or otherwise. |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2
| ok.. but the fact remains that only people who have paid for the content have access to it. The content providers are trying to have a double dip on the cable co. who in turn charges the consumer for access. I would agree if they were selling the product to a different customer, but servicing the same market with the same product, imo, the value of damage in this case is nill.
One would think that the opportunity to increase the following of this content would be embraced by the people who create it.
Or maybe they just think we are a bunch of sheep  |
|
