eHomeUpgrade on FacebookeHomeUpgrade on FriendFeedeHomeUpgrade on TwittereHomeUpgrade on YouTubeSubscribe via E-mailSubscribe via RSS

Cablevision Sued over Planned Network DVR Service

By Alexander Grundner | May 25th, 2006 Interest Level: SMOKING HOT


cablevision logoAs always the case with any new and innovative technology, the content industry goes nuts trying to see how they can profit from it or squash it. In the case of Cablevision’s “network DVR” that allows subscribers to pay extra to have the company remotely host their TV recordings, which can then be accessed from any standard, company issued set-top box, the answer is both (via Zatz Not Funny). BusinessWeek explains: “Studios say the law, under ‘fair use,’ gives consumers the right to time shift. But it doesn’t give that right to companies that license the content only for simultaneous broadcast, meaning that to store the shows and offer them on demand for a fee, companies must obtain a separate license.” Sounds like a sticky legal mess, but a topic worth keeping track of.

Comments | Post via Twitter / Facebook ID or Register

Short URL: http://bit.ly/91vL6n [+]  Filed in: Industry Buzz  
____________
Alexander Grundner is the Editor & Publisher of eHomeUpgrade. He has been following "Digital Home" developments since 2003. He's also a fan of cross-platform, open development software and industry standards related to media, networking, and the web. You can catch his daily tech musings on Twitter: @agrundner.
[Subscribe via RSS 2.0 | Follow us on Twitter]
  • Andrew McLaughlin
    The networks will lose this argument/lawsuit hands down. Cablevision has set this whole business up in such a way as to protect against this exact lawsuit. The service acts in an identical mannar as would a DVR in the home and, if earlier reports were accurate, Cablevision is actually leasing the subscriber the drive space in the head-end so that the end users actually has "ownership" of the space; just like you lease the DVR from the cable companies today. Therefore, its technically no different that if you had a 600 foot coax cable and an IR repeater to your cablebox in the headend.




    If the networks were smart they would embrace this technology and try to cut a deal with cablevision in order to limit the FF/RR through advertisments. This is really a hybrid of place-shifting and time-shifting. The only company that should really be concerned about this lawsuit is Sling Media since the only grounds that the networks might have is that the "rebroadcasting" is not legal.





    Personally, I think its a lost cause for the networks, and I see this move by Cablevision to be a significant innovation. Think of the ineficiency of having 100,000 copies of Desperate Housewives stored in HD on 30gb DVR hard drives; as opposed to 1 copy available to 100,000 people on a 30TB disk array. Those HD DVR's aren't cheap and they break. Alot!





    Here is my prediction, Cablevision will push to have their day in court sooner or later and will make some sort of deal with the networks, maybe. The Dolan family isn't one to back down from a fight when they know what's in ther best interest. The other major cable operators will follow suit before the end of the year and launch similar initaitives.





    So long as the cable company is letting me buy high quality, instant access, storage on the network in the head-end, I'd love to buy a few extra TB's for all of my music, DVD's, photo's, and data! Now there's a business idea for someone!!!!!
blog comments powered by Disqus