Supreme Court Questions Aereo As Battle With Broadcasters Struggles Toward Decision


The Aereo legal team had about all it could handle Tuesday as they got worked over by Supreme Court justices that were questioning the legality and logic behind their television streaming service.

Aereo, an online video service, provides local television programming streamed to its subscribers, which does not please the local television station owners, and has resulted in this culmination of a 2-year legal battle.

But even the Supreme Court seems a bit stumped. As with rulings on many emerging technologies, there are concerns about the unintended ramifications their decisions might have, both now and in the future.

“This is really hard for me,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

The other justices seemed to concur, their questions expressing apprehension that a “broad ruling” against Aereo would have a negative impact on the nascent cloud computing industry, and that was something they seemed to want to avoid.

“I’m hearing everybody having the same problem,” said Justice Stephen Breyer. While any ruling in this case would just be in regard to Aereo and their technology, “somehow catching other things” with a Supreme Court ruling, such as cloud computing, could be a mistake.

“I don’t see how to get out of it,” said Breyer, and as the session concluded, predicting the Supreme Court’s decision was a toss-up.

On the one side you have the broadcasters which include ABC, Comcast, CBS, Disney, NBC and 21st Century Fox. As far as they’re concerned Aereo is operating illegally by violating the rights of networks to exclusively transmit their shows to viewers.

Aereo, meanwhile, says it’s simply providing its own version of a TV antennae to its subscribers that just happens to also record programs for later playback. Aereo claims it’s really doing nothing more than what a consumer has a right to do with other in-home products.

A lawyer for the networks, Paul Clement, says Aereo’s legal take “simply blinks reality. They provide thousands of paying strangers with public performances over the TV.” Clement also put forwaard that if Aereo goes down in court and ceases to exist, “nobody should cry a tear over that.”

Aereo Lawyer, David Fredrick, begged to differ, saying, “Aereo is an equipment provider. Nothing happens on Aereo’s equipment until a user initiates the system.” He went on to compare Aereo’s service with generations-gone-by videocassette recorders, suggesting the two were quite similar in spirit.

Both sides felt they’d come out on top following the hearing, Clement saying on behalf of the broadcasters, “The justices understood the technology. They understood the stakes in the case.”

But again, Aereo lawyer, David Fredrick, saw things differently, saying they were “cautiously optimistic” the Supreme Court would see things their way.

The Supreme Court is expected to reach a decision by early summer, essentially deciding Aereo’s fate.

Share this article: Supreme Court Questions Aereo As Battle With Broadcasters Struggles Toward Decision
More from Inquisitr