High Court to Hear Copyright Battle Over Tiny TV Antennas

, The National Law Journal

   |0 Comments

Aereo's remote TV antenna is the size of a dime.
Aereo's remote TV antenna is the size of a dime.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday afternoon granted review in ABC v. Aereo, a high-stakes copyright dispute that could shake the television industry to its core. The case will likely be argued in April and decided by the end of the term in late June.

The case was brought by broadcast networks ABC, NBC, CBS and PBS, among others, against the 2011 upstart Aereo, which transmits free broadcast shows individually to customers through dime-sized antennas.

The networks say the technology was meant to evade the Copyright Act, which gives copyright holders the exclusive right to "perform the copyrighted work publicly." They say Aereo threatens their ability to produce marquee sports or awards shows, including the Academy Awards, the Grammys and the Super Bowl. CBS, Fox and Univision television networks are among those that say they might end their free broadcasts and become a subscription-only channel like CNN, Nickelodeon and Discovery if Aereo is successful.

The networks have supplemented their advertising revenue with fees from cable and satellite TV companies for redistributing their stations to subscribers. If customers drop their pay-TV service and use Aereo, broadcasters would lose some of that revenue.

Aereo claims what it is doing is legal because it has thousands of tiny antennas at its data centers and assigns individual subscribers their own antenna. According to Aereo, that makes it akin to customers picking up free broadcast signals with a regular antenna at home.

Aereo's service starts at $8 a month and currently covers New York, Boston, Houston and Atlanta, among other places. Subscribers get about two dozen local over-the-air stations, plus the Bloomberg TV financial channel.

In July 2012, Southern District Judge Alison Nathan (See Profile) in WNET v. Aereo, 12 Civ. 1543, denied the networks' motion for a preliminary injunction blocking Aereo's service (NYLJ, July 12, 2012).

At the Second Circuit, Judge Christopher Droney (See Profile), joined by Eastern District Judge John Gleeson (See Profile) sitting by designation, agreed that Aereo's service did not violate broadcasters' copyrights and that its transmission method did not add up to a public performance, but instead to thousands of private performances.

Judge Denny Chin (See Profile) dissented, calling Aereo's business model a "sham."

The Second Circuit's decision, the networks say in their brief, "is already transforming the industry and threatening the very fundamentals of broadcast television." They say Supreme Court intervention "is urgently needed."

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202637727967

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.