Loading...
A ruling was issued on Wednesday by the Supreme Court in the Aeroe case. According to The Huffington Post, Aereo violated copyright law when it streamed broadcast television signals to subscribers without paying for those feeds. The ruling came in at 6-3 against Aereo, which reversed a federal appeals court decision.
Aereo is just two-years-old and could now be in danger of disappearing following the ruling from the top court in the country. Aereo argued in court that it does not need to pay fees because the signals from broadcast stations are free.
The founder of Aereo, Chet Kanojia, released the following statement after the verdict, according to HuffPost:
“We will continue to fight for our consumers and fight to create innovative technologies that have a meaningful and positive impact on our world,” Kanojia said.
The justices who sided with the broadcasters in the case included Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
“Aereo sells a service that allows subscribers to watch television programs, many of which are copyrighted, virtually as they are being broadcast,” the opinion said, according to HuffPost.
The dissent included Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito Jr. The dissenting opinion was written by Scalia. Scalia said that “what Aereo is doing (or enabling to be done) to the networks’ copyrighted programming ought not to be allowed. The point is that subscribers call all the shots.”
Public Knowledge also released a statement, which was obtained by HuffPost. It said the following: The decision was “very unfortunate for consumers” because Aereo “has provided an innovative service that brings consumers more choices, more control over their programming, and lower prices. We’re concerned that the court’s misreading of the law leaves consumers beholden to dominant entertainment and cable companies that constantly raise prices and gouge consumers.”
