For the broadcasting companies, this invention provides a huge issue given now that a third party is able to make a profit off the programs these companies provide. Now, the question in the courts come down to contesting whether the stream service that Aereo provides through their individualized antennas is public or private. If private, the claims of the broadcasting companies cannot be upheld.
A more important issue to look at is if this patent is really necessary. It may seem that the device presented in the patent is not truly novel. There are preexisting products out there like TV Slingbox that have been around before this device that provide similar streaming services. Is it important for the court to recognize this point and throw Aereo's case out the window? I do agree that it may be interesting to have these low cost tiny antennas that can go to mobile devices but it just does not seem that innovative.
I am also concerned about the strength of the business plan here. The idea is that people will be buying this device and realizing that there are other alternatives out there. Streaming services like Netflix and Hulu can definitely cover the entertainment needs of the consumers. Also, any news coverage can be easily shown at the consumer's finger tips through app services like CNN and the New York Times.
The question now becomes whether this patent is actually necessary and has it made a huge impact on the technology? It seems that the patent is at least effective in stirring up some conflict between the broadcast groups and Aereo. It has been banned in some states but it will be interesting to see what the national ruling would be here.
http://www.stlr.org/2013/10/aereos-latest-victory-what-does-it-mean-for-the-future-of-broadcast-television/
http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20140090004
http://blog.azbuslaw.com/2014/04/04/online-video-startup-aereo-to-face-supreme-court-in-copyright-dispute/
I never really thought about small antennae on a portable device to essentially stream TV. I think it could be potentially useful, especially if you're out of the house but want to catch your weekly TV show. However, with all these available online streaming services, you can always watch your show the next day on a computer. Granted, a few companies have been posting week-long wait times for online viewership such as ABC, and if this trend continues, I would totally buy one of these devices. However, many other sites remain free and you can get next day viewing. Also, as you mentioned, there are many other resources out there like Hulu, Netflix, Amazon, etc. I guess maybe this patent is in place so that in the event of a market for such a product, Aereo is out ahead. Besides, they might be trying to create the market for this product right now. Who knows?
ReplyDeleteThe problems with companies whose business plans are formed solely based on internet capabilities, the issue that you described previously — private or public products — can never be avoided. Video streaming, especially! I cannot remember a time before high school when I could this quickly and easily stream videos from my computer; it's interesting to see how things are evolving as the years speed by.
ReplyDeleteThe product in question is small antennas that allow broadcast to be received by devices like a mobile phone. Your post argues that this may not even be necessary when smart phone now have the capability to access cnn and nyt through their app service. My question is then, did technology just skip a step? It seems as if the next obvious step WAS to have handheld devices that is capable of watching broadcast stations but it appears as if the Internet and apps have allowed us to achieve the same service by other means.
ReplyDelete