[opendtv] Broadcasters Sue Online Streaming Company Over Copyright
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 18:08:57 -0500
Another very timely article.
Two points that shouldn't be missed:
1. This is a streaming service, as described here. Which means, this is an
Internet-based "linear model."
2. I'll bet the beef is that the content owners don't have control over who
gets to view these copied streams.
http://www.ivi.tv/
Looks like $4.99/mo. The question being, do they pay the content owners
according to how many subscribers they have? If not, and especially because
they don't need to install their own infrastructure, of course their rates can
remain lower than the competition.
Here's the way these things really play out. If all cable subscribers should
become broadband-only subscribers, and use this sort of service for TV content,
their cable fee will go down. But the content owners will simply charge this
sort of "over the top" service higher rates, which reflect their actual
viewership. And guess where that gets made up.
Bert
------------------------------------
http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/107088
Broadcasters Sue Online Streaming Company Over Copyright
09.29.2010.
Several broadcast groups and major content owners filed a lawsuit on Tuesday
against ivi.TV, a Seattle based online service that streams broadcast and cable
content, claiming that the service violates copyright law.
The lawsuit, which was filed in a New York federal district court, also
requests that the service be discontinued while the court reviews the action.
The suit was filed by, among others, CBS, NBC, Disney, PBS, Cox, WPIX and the
office of the MLB commissioner.
ivi.TV is trying to skirt current copyright laws by claiming that it is an
online cable provider, but not a cable provider under traditional
telecommunications laws. It also says that, unlike previous online streaming
services that incurred broadcasters' wrath, like iCraveTV 10 years ago, that it
pays broadcasters under copyright laws. The company termed this week's actions
as a "predictable move to stifle innovation and technology," and in a press
release issued yesterday announcing the new service, countered that ivi.TV is
"the consumer's and television industry's new best friend."
"We pay broadcasters in accordance with the law, just like cable," the company
said in its response to the lawsuit. "This is not about copyright, this is
about competition. In an initial knee-jerk reaction, broadcasters fought
against cable companies, then joined them. Broadcasters then fought against
satellite companies, then joined them. Today, it is our turn. ivi TV pays
broadcasters and we increase their viewership."
The plaintiffs said they filed the lawsuit because of their "commitment to
protect our rights vigorously. This is a company that's simply stealing our
broadcast signals and copyrighted programming and streaming them on the
Internet without permission." They claim that ivi.TV plans to add several more
stations to its streaming service-now carrying signals from Seattle and New
York TV stations-and that such actions could lead to "substantial irredeemable
losses" to stations and copyright license holders."
ivi.TV claims that its service, available via a downloadable app for $4.99 a
month, after a free 30-day trial," could save consumers an average of almost
$800 a year, based on a current average monthly cable subscription of $71.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: