Locast's Attempt to
Sneak Re-broadcast Streaming Live Television Under Non-profit Copyright
Exemption
Start-up company, Locast,
has a new twist on streaming live television by capturing broadcasters’
television signals and streaming their content.
So what is Locast’s strategy
for avoiding the same fate as Aereo and being found liable for copyright
infringement?
First, let’s look at the technology that Locast is
using. Locast’s technology is basically
unremarkable: a single antenna, a single receive, a single server, and multiple
users. This is completely different than
Aereo’s novel and unique technology aimed at a futile attempt to avoid copyright restrictions on
public performance / re-transmission of broadcasters’ content, by using a separate
antenna for each transmission, and assert that the transmission is not “public”
but private transmission, albeit multiple, single transmissions.
However, unlike the "for profit" company, Aereo, Locast aims
low as a "non-profit" organization. As a
non-profit, Locast hopes to slide under the non-profit exemption that allows
non-profit companies to “secondary transmission of broadcast programing by cable.” 17 U.S.C. § 111 (a) (5) (emphasis
added).
For argument sake, let’s assume that Locast is really a
non-profit and in keeping with the statutory requirements of § 111 (a)(5), it does not have direct or indirect commercial
benefit or advantage in the service.
Seems like, so far, so good for Locast. But, wait...
Not so fast….
Subsequent to Aereo being found liable for copyright infringement
for separately streaming broadcasts’ content to respective subscribers
(viewers), Aereo applied for a license with the U.S. Copyright Office to be an
authorized re-broadcaster/distributor or cable provider under the compulsory
licensing provisions of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 111 (§111), “secondary
transmission of broadcast programing by cable.”
The important word in the statute is “cable.” The U.S. Copyright Office denied Aereo’s
application based on a finding that Internet streaming does not meet the
definition of cable under § 111. Therefore, the Copyright Office denied Aereo's
request to pay compulsory licensing fees to retransmit broadcast television
signals over the Internet. See Aereo's
Online Streaming Broadcast TV Caught Between a Rock and a Hard Place.
Based on how the U.S. Copyright Office interpreted “cable”
re-broadcast and streaming content to not be equivalent in the context of compulsory
licensing broadcasters’ content under § 111, it looks like Locast may have a
steep climb to get out of potential copyright infringement hole that it has
dug. Time will tell….
Send
email feedback- sweyer@stites.com
...update coming very soon on the current copyright lawsuit moving through federal court in NY
ReplyDelete