Home » Stream » Recent Articles:

Broadcasters Run to the Courts to Stop Disruptive Video Streaming; Aereo’s Legality

Phillip Dampier May 15, 2012 Competition, Consumer News, Online Video, Public Policy & Gov't, Video Comments Off on Broadcasters Run to the Courts to Stop Disruptive Video Streaming; Aereo’s Legality

An innovative plan to rent New Yorkers a dime-sized over-the-air antenna housed in a Brooklyn data center to receive and stream local broadcasters could be the end of broadcast TV as we know it, at least if you believe the claims being made by network executives in their high-powered lawsuit.

Aereo, which charges $12 a month to an invitation-only customer base, is the target of serious legal action brought by the major broadcast networks and local TV stations that believe Aereo’s disruptive business model could allow cable operators to avoid paying retransmission consent fees for free, over the air television signals.

Aereo only streams local broadcasters in the New York metropolitan area to residents within viewing range of the signals. The company argues it operates legally because of a time-tested, sound legal principle: the Communications Act of 1934, which offers broadcasters a license to use the public airwaves in return for operating in the public interest. Aereo only rents its tiny antennas to one customer at a time, and provides them with streamed video received by that antenna. The company charges a nominal monthly fee to cover the costs of operating its data center and to cover streaming expenses.

The monthly subscription fee grants viewers access to watch one channel while recording another on a cloud-based DVR “storage locker.” Viewers can watch the signals on just about any device, as long as they are located within the New York metropolitan area. Travelers and those who live outside of the area cannot watch programming or subscribe to the service.

The threat to the nation’s pay television operators and broadcasters is obvious. Over the air television broadcasters increasingly rely on so-called “retransmission consent payments” collected from pay television operators in return for permission to place their signals on the cable, telco, or satellite TV dial. Broadcasters bank on that growing revenue. Pay television providers grudgingly agree to the payments and promptly pass them on to already rate-increase-weary subscribers, who want a way out of paying for hundreds of channels they don’t care to watch.

Aereo's over the air antenna is about the size of a dime.

Aereo breaks the business models of both broadcasters and the cable industry. Cord cutters can get reliable and cheap reception of over-the-air stations without dealing with cumbersome in-home antennas (or paying local cable companies for HD-quality local stations and a DVR box). Goodbye $70 cable-TV bill. Broadcasters also lose every time the local pay television company drops a subscriber. Aereo does not pay retransmission consent fees, nor do their subscribers.

But Aereo is not all bad news for pay television providers. If Aereo can survive the legal onslaught from broadcast interests, nothing stops local cable companies from licensing Aereo technology (or constructing their own system) that would bypass retransmission consent fees as well. That could save cable operators millions.

Ridiculous? Not according to Matt Bond, an executive vice-president at Comcast/NBC who told a New York federal court the risk is real.

“It makes little economic sense for cable systems and satellite broadcasters to continue to pay for NBCU content on a per-subscriber basis when, with a relatively modest investment, they can simply modify their operations to mirror Aereo’s ‘individual antenna’ scheme and retransmit, for free, over-the-air local broadcast programming,” Bond said. “I know for a fact that cable companies have already considered such a model.”

Diller

Broadcasters revile Aereo’s disruptive innovation.  Bond called the service “piracy.” Other network executives say it steals their content and resells it at a profit. Some are even predicting the destruction of broadcast television as we know it if Aereo is found to be legal. Virtually every network is on board for the lawsuit, which seeks an immediate injunction that would shut the service down.

Barry Diller, a veteran broadcast executive, has invested in Aereo and calls the broadcasters’ fears rubbish.

“It’s not the beginning of the destruction of anybody,” Diller told New York Magazine. “TV wasn’t the destruction of the movie business. Television wasn’t the destruction of radio. Cable wasn’t the destruction of broadcast networks. What happens is new alternatives come, and they live alongside whatever existed.”

“You have an antenna that has your name on it, figuratively … and it’s one-to-one. It is not a network,” Diller told members of the Senate Commerce Committee during a recent hearing. “It is a platform for you to simply receive, over the Internet, broadcast signals that are free and to record them and use them on any device that you like.”

Aereo is not a pioneer in the video streaming of over the air signals. iCraveTV launched in 1999 streaming broadcast stations from Buffalo, N.Y. and Ontario, Canada from its home base in Toronto. Broadcasters filed suit and quickly shut the service down. ivi-TV tried a similar venture in 2011 and was also shut down. Even companies experimenting with IPTV technology have run into trouble with some networks that feel threatened by a possible precedent that could be mistakenly established, starting a flood of similar services.

To date, only services that agree to broadcaster sanctions (Slingbox) or who have retransmission consent contracts with providers (such as the cable industry’s TV Everywhere project) have survived, but all have limitations imposed on their functionality that reduce their usefulness to consumers.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Aereo TV Demo May 2012.flv[/flv]

Aereo TV was demonstrated by the company CEO Chet Kanojia at the New York Tech Meetup May 9.  (21 minutes)

Comcast Proves It Doesn’t Need a 250GB Usage Cap; Net Neutrality Violation Alleged

Comcast Monday announced it was exempting its new Xbox streaming video service from the company’s long standing 250GB monthly usage cap, claiming since the network doesn’t exist on the public Internet, there is no reason to cap its usage.

Net Neutrality advocates immediately denounced the cable operator for violating Net Neutrality, giving favorable treatment to its own video service while leaving Netflix, Amazon, and others under its usage cap regime.

Public Knowledge president Gigi Sohn:

“The Xbox 360 provides a number of video services to compete for customer dollars, yet only one service is not counted against the data cap—the one provided by Comcast.” Sohn said. “This is nothing less than a wake-up call to the Commission to show it is serious about protecting the Open Internet.”

Stop the Cap! believes Comcast also inadvertently undercut its prime argument for the company’s 250GB usage cap — that it assures “heavy users” don’t negatively impact the online experience of other customers:

We work hard to manage our network resources effectively and fairly to ensure a high-quality online experience for all of our customers. But XFINITY Internet service runs on a shared network, so every user’s experience is potentially affected by his or her neighbors’ Internet usage.

Our number one priority is to ensure that every customer has a superior Internet service experience. Consistent with that goal, the threshold is intended to protect the online experience of the vast majority of our customers whose Internet speeds could be degraded because one or more of their neighbors engages in consistent high-volume Internet downloads and uploads.

The threshold also addresses potential problems that can be caused by the exceedingly small percentage of subscribers who may engage in very high-volume data consumption (over 250 GB in a calendar month). By applying a very high threshold on monthly consumption, we can help preserve a good online experience for everyone.

Comcast argues around the exemption of the Xbox service by reclassifying it as somehow separate from the public Internet.  The company then tries to claim the Xbox app functions more like an extra set top box, not as a data service.  But, in fact, it –is– a data service delivered over the same cable lines as Comcast’s broadband service, subject to the same “last-mile congestion problem” Comcast dubiously uses as the primary justification for placing limits on customers.

Cable providers who limit broadband use routinely use the “shared network experience” excuse as a justification for usage control measures.  Since cable broadband delivers a fixed amount of bandwidth into individual neighborhoods which everyone shares, a single user or small group of users can theoretically create congestion-related slowdowns during peak usage times.  Cable operators have successfully addressed this problem with upgrades to DOCSIS 3 technology, which supports a considerably larger pipeline unlikely to be congested by a few “heavy users.”

Comcast’s argument the Xbox service doesn’t deserve to be capped because it is delivered over Comcast’s own internal network misses the point.  That content reaches customers over the same infrastructure Comcast uses to reach every customer.  If too many customers access the service at the same time, it is subject to precisely the same congestion-related slowdowns as their broadband service.  Data is data — only the cable company decides whether to treat it equally with its other services or give it special, privileged attention.

Even if Comcast argues the Xbox streaming service exists on its own segregated, exclusive “data channel,” that represents part of a broader data pipeline that could have been dedicated to general Internet use.  The fact that special pipeline is available exclusively for Comcast’s chosen favorites, while keeping usage limits on immediate competitors, is discriminatory.

Comcast customers who have lived under an inflexible 250GB usage limit since 2008 should be wondering why the company can suddenly open unlimited access to some services while refusing to adjust its own usage limits on general broadband service.

Stop the Cap! believes Comcast has forfeit its own justification for usage caps and network management techniques that can slow customer Internet speeds.  We have no problem with the company offering unlimited access to the Xbox streaming service. But the company must treat general Internet access with equal generosity, removing the unjustified and arbitrary usage cap it imposed on customers in 2008.  After all, if the company can find vast, unlimited resources for a service it launched only this year, it should be able to find equal resources for a service it has sold customers (at a remarkable profit) for more than a decade.

Anything less makes us believe Comcast’s usage caps are more about giving some services an unfair advantage — violating the very Net Neutrality guidelines Comcast claimed it would voluntarily honor.

Stop the Cap! strongly believes usage caps are increasingly less about good network management and more about controlling and monetizing the online experience, seeking marketplace advantages and new revenue streams from consumers who already pay some of the world’s highest prices for broadband service.  As we’ve argued since 2008, Internet Overcharging through usage caps and usage based billing is also an end run around Net Neutrality.  The evidence is now apparent for all to see.

[Thanks to our readers Scott and Yannio for sharing developments.]

New Zippy Fast 4G iPad Burns Through AT&T/Verizon Usage Allowances in Hours

The new 4G LTE-equipped Apple iPad you picked up late last week may be burning a hole in your wallet more than you think.  Across the country, consumers are reporting shock and surprise when they discover the new, faster mobile broadband-equipped tablet is capable of blowing through AT&T and Verizon Wireless’ monthly usage caps in a matter of hours.

The culprits: online video and giant-sized app downloads.

Online video on a usage-limited mobile broadband plan simply does not last long on Apple’s newest sensation.  A Wall Street Journal article found one new iPad owner discouraged after a two hour basketball game completely obliterated his 3GB usage allowance provided by AT&T.  With $10/GB overlimit fees just around the corner, AT&T is set to earn enormous data fees from customers who use their iPads to stream video.

[flv width=”512″ height=”308″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSJ New Apple iPad Eats Up Monthly Data Plans 3-21-12.flv[/flv]

The Wall Street Journal reports the newest iPad has been out for less than a week and buyers are already burning through their monthly data allowances on usage capped 4G mobile plans.  (3 minutes)

USA Today tech columnist Edward Baig also blew through his allowance in less than one day:

Less than 24 hours after purchasing the Verizon Wireless version of the iPad + 4G — and choosing a $30, 2GB monthly data plan from Verizon — I was shocked by the notification on my iPad’s screen: “There is no data remaining on your current plan.”

My remaining options for the month included changing to a $50 5GB data plan or an $80 10GB plan. (AT&T offers a 250MB plan for $14.99; 3GB for $30; and 5GB for $50.)

[…] In my case, I wasn’t watching video. What nailed me, I think, is that I was wirelessly downloading a number of the apps that I had already purchased for my older iPad onto the latest model. Those apps were made available through Apple’s iCloud.

To help avoid just this situation, the new iPad has a 50MB per app download limit on 4G. Anything over that, and you’re directed to Wi-Fi. (The over-the-air download limit on 3G-capable iPads was 20MB.) But that’s a per-app limit, and all those smaller-sized apps I was moving to the new iPad collectively added up.

Storing anything on Apple’s iCloud service or other backup storage sites like Dropbox can prove costly when relying on 4G service from AT&T and Verizon.  That’s on top of Apple’s premium price for 4G-equipped iPads, which start at $629 (comparable Wi-Fi only models are priced at $499 and above).  As a result, consumers are shutting off the wireless mobile feature they paid $130 extra to receive.

“All the advantages of the iPad device are completely neutralized by [AT&T’s] two gigabyte data limit,” Steve Wells told the Journal.

Some customers are upgrading their mobile data plans to 5GB for $50 a month, offered by both AT&T and Verizon.  Others are learning to stick to Wi-Fi.  According to a study conducted by the consulting firm Chetan Sharma, nearly 90% of tablets bought in the United States are Wi-Fi only models.  The added cost for mobile-equipped tablets and the expensive data plans that accompany them are largely responsible.

Consumer Advice:

  1. You can still leverage 4G mobile broadband speeds on a cheaper Wi-Fi-only equipped iPad if your smartphone supports the “mobile hotspot” feature. When activated, your phone becomes a Wi-Fi hotspot your iPad can connect to for wireless data. If you have an unlimited mobile hotspot plan from Verizon Wireless (now difficult to obtain unless you are grandfathered on an unlimited data plan), you are not subject to Verizon’s usage limits for mobile devices.
  2. Rely as much as possible on Wi-Fi, especially for file downloads or streamed content. Since the iPad can seamlessly switch between Wi-Fi and expensive mobile data service, protect yourself by shutting off Cellular Data within the settings menu when you don’t absolutely need to use it.
  3. Turn off LTE service when not needed. 4G consumes battery life faster and its speeds encourage the kind of increased usage that can exhaust your allowance.
  4. Monitor how much data you’ve used from the settings menu. Web browsing and e-mail will not consume a lot.  Online video and giant app downloads will.

[Thanks to our regular readers Scott and Earl for sending in several stories reporting on this.]

Apple iPad in the News:

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Brown Says He Wouldnt Ditch iPad 2 for New Version 3-16-12.mp4[/flv]

Joe Brown, editor-in-chief at Gizmodo.com, talks about Apple Inc.’s new iPad, the outlook for Amazon.com Inc.’s Kindle Fire and the tablet market. Brown speaks with Jon Erlichman on Bloomberg Television’s “Bloomberg West.” (6 minutes)

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WNYW New York Record Breaking Sales for iPad 3-19-12.mp4[/flv]

Shelly Palmer talks about the record-breaking sales numbers of the new Apple iPad. He discusses what is great and not so great about the new tablet on New York’s WNYW-TV.  (4 minutes)

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Reynolds Sees No Danger Despite New IPad’s Higher Heat 3-20-12.mp4[/flv]

Paul Reynolds, electronics editor for Consumer Reports, talks about the magazine’s temperature test of Apple Inc.’s new iPad. The newest iPad runs “significantly hotter” than the earlier model when conducting processor-intensive tasks such as playing graphics-heavy games, Consumer Reports said on its website.  (9 minutes)

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WFXT Boston New Ipad Is it Worth it 3-22-12.flv[/flv]

It’s the hottest item in the tech world – literally. WFXT in Boston also takes a look at how other tablet manufacturers are doing in competition with Apple.  (4 minutes)

Time Warner Cable Adding Local Channels to TWC Apps, Starting With NYC

Phillip Dampier March 20, 2012 Consumer News, Online Video 1 Comment

Time Warner Cable’s online streaming apps that deliver dozens of national cable networks to authenticated cable TV subscribers have never included local broadband television channels, until now.

The cable operator announced it has added 26 local stations to the lineup, but they are viewable only if you have Time Warner Cable service in the New York City region.

The new channels include primary over the air stations and digital “sub-channels” that include niche, classic, ethnic, and special interest programming:

  • WCBS HDTV (CBS)
  • WNBC HDTV (NBC)
  • NBC NY Nonstop
  • WNYW HD (Fox)
  • WABC HDTV (ABC)
  • Live Well HD
  • WABC News Now
  • WWOR HD (My9)
  • WPIX-HD (PIX11)
  • WPXN HD (ION)
  • WXTV HD (Univision)
  • WFUT HD (Telefutura)
  • WNJU HD (Telemundo)
  • WFME
  • WLIW (PBS)
  • World
  • WLNY (TV 10/55)
  • WMBC
  • WNJN HD (or WNJB or NJN1) – PBS
  • WNYE (NYC TV Life)
  • WRNN
  • WNET (Thirteen HD)
  • V-ME
  • Create
  • Kids13
  • Rise (Al Jazeera)

Time Warner says they have an interest in expanding local station streaming in other cities sometime this year.  When we know which cities and stations will be included, we will pass them along.

Updated: Here Come the Streaming Paywalls: Comcast, March Madness Now Charging for Online Access

Phillip Dampier February 22, 2012 Comcast/Xfinity, Consumer News, Online Video, Video 3 Comments

The Great Wall of Pay

Now that the cable industry’s “TV Everywhere” online video platform has been established, some programmers are discovering they can become lucrative revenue streams as well as a deterrent to cable cord-cutting.

Time Warner (no relationship to Time Warner Cable) and CBS have decided giving away live sports programming for free is unacceptable and will now charge for online viewing of certain March Madness basketball games.

Since 2006, the basketball tournament, which may include hoops from https://www.megaslam.com.au/adjustable-basketball-hoops/, has been available for free online viewing, but starting March 7, viewers will need to pay $3.99 for full access to all 67 games [and basic cable viewers will need to verify] they are current cable, satellite, or telco TV subscribers. [See clarification below.]

Online viewing of games televised on CBS will be available for free, but the new paywall will block free access to selected games shown on cable networks TNT, TBS, and TruTV in certain cases.

Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes sees charging for online viewing as a substantial new revenue stream.

Monetizing online viewing is a high priority for programmers, even though much of the programming will continue to carry commercial advertising.  Last year, an estimated 2.6 million daily visitors watched March Madness online.  At $3.99 each, that would net the two companies nearly $10.4 million dollars.

The madness will now cost you $3.99

In a separate announcement, Comcast says it will launch a new Netflix-like on-demand streaming service tomorrow for its cable subscribers.

Streampix (free for triple play customers, $4.99/mo for others) will offer on-demand movies and TV series licensed from NBC-Universal, Warner Bros., Sony Pictures, and Disney.

Selected content can be watched while on the go, but a substantial amount of what Streampix is expected to offer is already available through services like Hulu.

Streampix is designed to appeal to customers who currently pay $7-8 a month for Netflix or Hulu+.

The move establishes Comcast’s own “paywall” for a deeper catalog of online video content, supplementing programming it gives away at no charge to “authenticated” cable subscribers.

Comcast will not sell Streampix to non-Comcast customers.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Comcast Streampix 2-21-12.flv[/flv]

Bloomberg reports Comcast’s Streampix service is unlikely to pose a major challenge to services like Netflix.  (4 minutes)

Clarification:  A reader suggested we better clarify the viewing options.  It gets complicated depending on what kind of video/broadband subscription you have, where you want to watch, and what kind of feed you want:

CBS-televised games: Available for free with no restrictions from CBS website.

Basic Cable games: If you want to watch outside of the home, on certain portable devices, or do not have a combined broadband/cable-TV subscription, you will need to purchase a subscription for $3.99 from the NCAA.  Free streaming is only available to authenticated cable/broadband subscribers watching from their home broadband account on devices pre-approved by your pay television provider.

Open/Full Access: If you want full, unrestricted access you need to pay for the NCAA ® March Madness ® Live™ app ($3.99).  Since this app provides the NCAA’s own video and audio feeds, you don’t need a cable subscription.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!