Tom Butts / 08.06.2012 06:24PM
Premature Victory?
Broadcast TV survives assaults on multiple fronts
Are we beginning
to see the unraveling
of the television
industry in favor of
a bright new Internet future
of ubiquitous video,
free from the contractual
obligations and financial
underpinnings of a decades-old business model?
Is the industry about to
become “Napsterized?” (We all know how
that turned out.) Although recent events
have prompted pundits to declare that the
broadcast and pay-TV cabals are on their last
legs, I think it’s still a little too early to predict
what the outcomes may be.
Exhibit A: Aereo. From iCraveTV.com
more than a decade ago, to ivi.tv, broadcasters
have been successful in shutting down
numerous Internet startups (although ivi.tv
has been shut down, the case is still pending
in the courts). And while some of the determining
factors have evolved over the years
(10 years ago, one of the broadcast industry’s
arguments was the fact that primitive
video streaming diminished the quality of
programming), the issue was usually never
about the technology but rather over copyright
issues and the illegal pirating of broadcast
signals. Even though some of these startups
had impressive pedigrees (among ivi.tv’s founders was Hal Bringman, who helped
launch Napster), none of them had the financial
clout (or the legal arguments) to last.
Broadcasters’
string of successes in this
arena came to a halt last month when a
U.S. District Court judge denied a request
by Fox, Univision, PBS, ABC, NBC, CBS, Telemundo
and several local New York TV stations
to force Aereo to shut down. Aereo, as
you know by now, is the New York-based
startup financed by media titan Barry Diller
that allows its subscribers to use a matrix of
dime-sized antennas to access live broadcast
signals over wireless broadband delivered
via several large antenna arrays in the New
York City area. The service, which operates
without consent from broadcasters, and offers
about 20 channels for $12 a month, is
currently only available in New York but the
company has plans to expand to 75–100 cities
within the next year.
Aereo says it isn’t
doing anything more
than providing antennas to its customers
to access free over-the-air TV, while broadcasters
disagree and claim that the service
is retransmitting live broadcast TV in direct
violation of copyright laws. In her decision
allowing Aereo to continue operating, the
judge drew parallels to the infamous 2006
Cablevision case in which several cable
networks sued the cable provider, claiming
that the company’s remote DVR service violated
copyright laws. In that case, the judge
said that such a service was a private, rather
than a public performance and was not in
violation. In the Aereo case, broadcasters say
there should be no comparison because the
programming in question is live transmissions,
but the judge disagreed and has allowed
Aereo to survive, for now. Broadcasters
are appealing the decision.
 |
Aereo claims that its dime-sized antennas receive HD over
wireless broadband delivered via
several
large “antenna arrays” in the New York City
area. |
Exhibit B: Viacom vs. DirecTV. This one
was a bit more familiar to consumers, as it
represented one more clash in the decades-old
battle over access to pay-TV programming.
Viacom wanted DirecTV to pony up
increased fees and guarantee placement of
a new network in its lineup. When an agreement
failed to materialize, Viacom pulled
26 of its cable networks, including Comedy
Central, MTV and Nickelodeon from DirecTV, and a very public advertising campaign to
win over the hearts and minds of TV watchers
nationwide ensued. The standoff lasted a
bit longer than similar conflicts in the past,
but in the end, an agreement was reached
and consumers got their “Daily Show” fix
back. But it’s hard to fathom who won in
the end: DirecTV, Viacom, or the advertising
agencies that produced the attack ads.
Whether the
arguments are over how
technology can alter consumers’ access to
programming or the more banal issue of
copyright laws, these latest skirmishes represent
how the pace of technological progress
continues to slowly advance through a filter
of various court decisions. If the argument is
over technology, Aereo is not all that compelling;
in fact, some have speculated that the
tiny antennas behind the company’s technology
are not capable of picking up signals
and that the arrays are just a ruse to enhance
the argument that subscribers are getting
the signal over-the-air legally. Whether or not
the technology works, however, is just a side
issue. Those who hoped that the Internet
would dismantle the current television business
model should perhaps hold off on any
victory parties just yet.
Thirty-five years ago, Steve
Dana, a northern
Virginia entrepreneur, launched “Broadcast
Equipment Exchange,” which he described
as “a new magazine serving your
total equipment needs.”
BEE eventually became
“Radio World,”
a leading publication for the industry. Six
years later, TV Technology joined the expanding
lineup of publications at what
was to become IMAS Publishing. Congratulations
to our sister publication
in achieving this important milestone!