Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Next Chapter

blog.aereo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 198 posts

Re: The Next Chapter

#71

Post by twelvedigits »

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures.

As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used.

Aereo "worked." It worked like magic.

First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast television to your phone or computer, and you could AirPlay it to your television. Everything was in HD. It worked incredibly well. So many video products fail to deliver on the user experience, or the video is choppy, or it crashes all the time. Aereo's software had its struggles, but it worked far more often than not. I could have people over and stream the Super Bowl and never worry that Aereo would crap out.

Aereo also worked remarkably well during Hurricane Sandy. I live in Brooklyn, and Aereo's Brooklyn HQ was less than a mile from my apartment, but we streamed Aereo until we went to sleep that night. Considering reports that their antennae sucked a ton of power, that's incredible on a night when power was out all across the city.

I also interviewed with the company in 2013 for a business development role. Everyone that I met was really great. They treated me well during the process while clearly balancing a million things, including their legal concerns. I really, really wanted to work there, but it wasn't a fit for a lot of reasons, their uncertain future being one of them.

When my girlfriend told me that they were filing for bankruptcy, I was sad. This is innovative technology that worked for consumers, squashed by antiquated government regulation and a highly litigious, innovation-resistant, influential media industry.

Progress, halted.

A winning product that could have delighted millions, squashed.

Re: The Next Chapter

#73

Post by rayiner »

twelvedigits wrote: post #71

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures. As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used. Aereo "worked." It worked like magic. First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast…

What is antiquated about the idea that you don't get to use other peoples' valuable content without paying for it?

Look: the valuable product here is the content. All the technology can do is get in the way. It's great Aereo's technology got in the way less than its competitors, but that still doesn't mean people found the technology itself valuable. The content is what matters. The content is what delights consumers.

Given that reality, I think it's absurd to say that regulations protecting the people who create the content, the product without which the whole downstream ecosystem of streaming services and content consumption devices are utterly irrelevant, it's absurd to say those regulations are antiquated.

Re: The Next Chapter

#74

Post by look_lookatme »

laichzeit0 wrote: post #62

Did Aereo as part of it's technology have the ability to strip out ads from content? Because honestly that's the only reason I haven't watched tv/cable whatever in years. Can't be bothered to waste my time on non-content when it's easier to just download a torrent and watch it via Plex. Or is this more aimed at sport, which necessarily needs to be "live" mostly?

And do you send the "tv/cable whatever" companies a check for whatever you think the content is worth? Otherwise you are just a thief.

Re: The Next Chapter

#75

Post by lbotos »

joelberman wrote: post #45
rayiner wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, changed the world by making it legal to build a business off someone else's content that you got for free through a legal hack. Tragic it didn't work out. The Blockbuster analogy is frankly insulting to people who built real technology for video delivery. Blockbuster went bankrupt because technology made their middle-man position obsolete. In contrast, there is nothing obsolete about making content. Even in the…

Isn't the content paid for by advertisers in exchange for your eyeballs? Wouldn't Aero increase the eyeballs? Wouldn't the advertisers be happy about more eyeballs? First the engineers run the company, then the marketers, then the finance people, then the lawyers. TV is being run by lawyers.

In the future, it's not just eyeballs, but qualified eyeballs. Marketing used to be regional now it's getting really personal. Tracking data allows you to do so much stuff:

facebook look-alike audiences google data etc.

Re: The Next Chapter

#76

Post by lbotos »

pc86 wrote: post #66
venomsnake wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problems right now are the IP laws IMO. They are way too heavily skewed for the benefit of the creator and not society, which makes building any innovation a game of begging. And gives the creator power to kill said innovation. I would love shorter terms and some form of FRAND compulsory licensing.

The content I create does not belong to society. It belongs to me. If I want to kill it that is my right.

I agree with you in theory, in practice we know this isn't the case. The way content is shared in 2014 and data is duplicated you don't have that right anymore if you are creating any type of digital content. Not out of some "overarching evil" but out of people's desire to share.

Re: The Next Chapter

#77

Post by varelse »

rayiner wrote: post #16
DevX101 wrote: post #12

I listened to a talk by an Aereo exec at SXSW and he made it clear then that there was no plan B. This was an all or nothing fight. Unfortunately the Supreme Court squashed them, but they really could have changed the world had the ruling gone the other way. ABC, NBC, CBS, and all the other broadcast networks would have had to change their business model and adapt or slowly die like the Blockbusters of the world. Des…

Yes, changed the world by making it legal to build a business off someone else's content that you got for free through a legal hack. Tragic it didn't work out. The Blockbuster analogy is frankly insulting to people who built real technology for video delivery. Blockbuster went bankrupt because technology made their middle-man position obsolete. In contrast, there is nothing obsolete about making content. Even in the…

Content being broadcast on ostensibly publicly owned airwaves (not that the "public" ever seemingly gets any say in this). While I agree with your point that they didn't own the content, making it illegal to provide a service that improves the reception on those public airwaves to local customers doesn't sit well with me. I'm equally annoyed with the shenanigans employed with Dish and DirectTV to block their broadcast of local channels to local customers. If the content owners are really that concerned here, they can simply move their content to privately owned channels.

Not that I ever expect a court ruling to say anything close to this because lobbyists and money, just saying...

Re: The Next Chapter

#78

Post by colinbartlett »

corbinpage wrote: post #22

This is such a shame. Aereo was an important part of my cord cutting strategy here in NYC. I can still get a lot of content from Roku + Chromecast but can't get the nationally broadcast channels (antennas won't work for my apartment location). Seems so backwards to me. I can't wait for an Aereo replacement if anyone knows of one.

Seems like that's the point: There is no legal replacement.

Now, I'd love to hear about some kind of non-legal replacement. Like some kind of crowd-sourced antenna array that makes it difficult to target and shut down.

Re: The Next Chapter

#79

Post by look_lookatme »

throwaway1592 wrote: post #41

While I applaud aereo's challenging of the law and twist on the law to create something. The outcome is correct! I read every day on hacker news; copyright laws are wrong, too long, not fair... I do not see it the same way. The hacker news community is a community who creates many things themselves; many of the community has chosen the path to give open licenses to their creation. This is their right and thankfully t…

Wow downvoters, it's ok to have an opinion like this!

Re: The Next Chapter

#80

Post by vertex-four »

raverbashing wrote: post #17
DevX101 wrote: post #12

I listened to a talk by an Aereo exec at SXSW and he made it clear then that there was no plan B. This was an all or nothing fight. Unfortunately the Supreme Court squashed them, but they really could have changed the world had the ruling gone the other way. ABC, NBC, CBS, and all the other broadcast networks would have had to change their business model and adapt or slowly die like the Blockbusters of the world. Des…

" ABC, NBC, CBS, and all the other broadcast networks would have had to change their business model and adapt or slowly die" But here's the thing. They still have to do that TV viewing is at an all-time low. Broadcast TV has a different business model than Cable, but viewings have been going down for both. Aereo's was too much a bet for too small of a win. "Now you can watch open TV on the internet" Any broadcaster c…

> Any broadcaster could decide to do this in house and it's done

Interestingly, in the UK, many broadcasters already do this. I can watch any BBC, ITV, or Channel 4 channel live from their websites, so long as I have a TV license.

Post reply on HN