AAPL Stock: 117.81 ( -0.22 )

Printed from

White House files anti-Aereo amicus brief with Supreme Court

updated 08:53 pm EST, Mon March 3, 2014

Amicus brief: server bank nixes value of single antenna per subscriber

The Obama administration has filed an amicus curae ("friend of the court") brief with the US Supreme Court, saying that it feels that web streamer Aereo must "obtain licenses to perform the copyrighted content on which its business relies." While the administration can't tell the court how to rule, the briefing is likely to set the tone for the hearing, set for April.

The brief claims that Aereo "does not simply provide access to equipment or other property that facilitates customers' reception of broadcast signals. Rather, respondent operates an integrated system -- i.e., a 'device or process' -- whose functioning depends on its customers' shared use of common facilities."

At stake with the Supreme Court hearing is Aereo's ability to capture the broadcasters' free signal by using a single antenna per subscriber in a geographical area, and stream it to users at a nominal subscription fee. Should Aereo prevail in the Supreme Court, it will see fewer court battles nationwide, and larger freedom to operate without pressure from broadcasters in markets it enters. The brief calls out the common servers used, which serves to invalidate the "individual antenna" protection that Aereo has prevailed on in other court battles, save one.

Today's amicus brief believes that Aereo's rebroadcasting is a public performance, and as such, requires a retransmission agreement between Aereo and the original broadcaster. However, it admits that "members of the public may legitimately acquire and use physical equipment (e.g., an improved television antenna) that enhances their ability to receive broadcast programming, and may privately perform [rebroadcast or stream] their own lawfully-acquired copies of copyrighted works [to their own devices]."

The administration does attempt to limit the damage to innovation its brief may cause. It says that "that conclusion, however, should not call into question the legitimacy of businesses that use the Internet to provide new ways for consumers to store, hear, and view their own lawfully-acquired copies of copyrighted works."


by MacNN Staff



  1. JackWebb

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 08-31-07

    And the cynical side of me immediately asks what's in it for the white house that they feel the need to take sides and try to influence this.

  1. efithian

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 04-21-04

    It looks like the broadcast networks and cable companies give significant political donations to try to stop companies from providing assistance in receiving free-to-air broadcasts. As a next step, I suppose Winegard and other antenna companies will be prohibited from selling equipment that allows consumers to bypass the exorbitant cable fees. Perhaps our politically divided supreme court will see past this deception perpetrated by the cable companies.

  1. chimaera

    Dedicated MacNNer

    Joined: 04-08-07

    No cynicism needed. Like the larger person needing the bigger slice of cake, it is obvious the bigger the corporation, the greater they need and deserve government help.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines

Follow us on Facebook


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Ultimate Ears Megaboom Bluetooth Speaker

Ultimate Ears (now owned by Logitech) has found great success in the marketplace with its "Boom" series of Bluetooth speakers, a mod ...

Kinivo URBN Premium Bluetooth Headphones

We love music, and we're willing to bet that you do, too. If you're like us, you probably spend a good portion of your time wearing ...

Jamstik+ MIDI Controller

For a long time the MIDI world has been dominated by keyboard-inspired controllers. Times are changing however, and we are slowly star ...


Most Commented