Unfazed by lawsuits, Aereo announces Austin launch

[Himanshu Arora]

Despite the lawsuits, the online television service provider Aereo isn't holding up its expansion plans. Just a week after Utah federal court imposed a preliminary injunction on its operations, the company has announced that it will launch its services to 1.25 million customers in the greater Austin area starting March 3. The company, however, has ceased operating in Salt Lake City and Denver, following last week's judgment.

The Austin area includes 12 counties across the state of Texas, and according to the company, residents who preregister at the company's website will be entitled for priority signup when Aereo's technology becomes available. The company earlier announced that it will launch its services in 22 cities by spring, but at present its coverage is limited to just 10 cities.

Aereo is a startup that provides online television services by retransmitting broadcast television signals to consumers via the Internet. Its subscription packages start at $8 a month. Backed by billionaire Barry Diller's IAC/InterActiveCorp, the company has been dragged to court by the broadcasting industry over copyright violations.

While Aereo won all the lawsuits, last week Utah's federal court became the first to side with the broadcasters. The Supreme court is scheduled next month to hear broadcast networks’ case against the startup. According to a USAToday report, broadcasters like CBS and Fox have threatened to cease broadcast, should the Supreme Court decide in Aereo's favor.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/55798-unfazed-lawsuits-aereo-announces-austin-launch.html

 

[wastedkill]

Maybe they just dont care?

The lawsuits themselves are pretty pathetic so they are like "Meh lets launch in other areas to show them how afraid we are meh meh baah"

 

[Guest]

I don't see how the various TV broadcast station owners, or the courts, can stop Aereo. If I put a TV antenna on top of my house, I am not expected to pay the TV broadcast station owners to receive their "free, over the air" TV signals. If I live in an apartment building that charged me for putting up an antenna on the roof of their apartment building, I don't see how the various TV broadcast station owners or courts can stop the apartment building owner from allowing me to do this or the owner from charging me a fee. Taking this a step further, if I live in an apartment building that charged me a monthly fee to use one of their roof antennas (because they don't trust me to put up an antenna on their roof and potentially damage their roof), I don't see how the various TV broadcast station owners or courts can stop the apartment building owner. The Aereo service is basically allowing me to rent one of their antennas to receive "free, over the air" TV signals. The only difference is that the Aereo facility is physically further away from my home which requires them to use the internet to get that "free, over the air" signal to my home, instead of using a simply coax cable like I would use between my roof antenna and my TV. In fact, the Aereo technology is similar to the HDHomeRun boxes. The HDHomeRun box is connected to an antenna via a coax cable, but it output's those TV signals it receives via Ethernet packets. I have to use some device (like a computer, or Roku box, etc.) to convert those Ethernet packets back into a form that my TV can use. Does this mean that the HDHomeRun boxes should be illegal too???

As far as Aereo offering a DVR service, how is that different than using a Tivo box? You can use a Tivo box to record "free, over the air" TV signals. All you have to do is connect your roof antenna to your Tivo box. You have to pay Tivo a monthly fee to do this. What's the difference between paying Tivo a monthly fee for their DVR or paying Aereo a monthly fee to use their DVR???

The TV broadcast station owners and the courts need to wake up.

-DTR