Time Warner Cable Goes to Court for iPad App Content Rights

[MacRumors]

Engadget reports that Time Warner Cable has taken Viacom to court to ask for declaratory judgement over the usage of cable content.Time Warner Cable announced this afternoon it has filed a request in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for a declaratory judgement regarding Viacom's cable networks. Time Warner continues to maintain its carriage agreements give it the right to allow subscribers access on any screen in their home, not just the TV and is apparently ready to prove that in court -- or at least drive Viacom, Discovery, Fox and other complaining networks towards more favorable negotiations.Viacom, of course, disagrees with that assessment and claims that existing content agreements don't cover the streaming of cable television to devices like the iPad.

The controversy began after Time Warner launched a free app for cable providers that allowed customers to stream cable television to their iPads. Time Warner, however, had to quickly pull several channels from the app due to complaints by several networks. Meanwhile, Cablevision followed up with their own app that offers 100% of their channels. Cablevision claims that this usage of content is fully permissible based on current content agreements. They claim that broadcasting onto additional screens within the home is permissible as the content is never streamed over the internet.

Article Link: Time Warner Cable Goes to Court for iPad App Content Rights

 

[Consultant]

At least some companies have a spine. Hope TW wins!

 

[Cheerwino]

This is a big deal. Interesting to see what happens. It all depends on how the contracts are worded.

 

[levitynyc]

If I lived alone and wasn't married, I'd seriously consider not having DirecTv or cable at all.

All I really watch is live sports and a few shows I watch on iTunes or Netflix. The 100 bucks a month I pay seems rather silly. Nonsense like this pushes 1 step closer to ditching cable / satellite.

 

[Small White Car]

Wait wait wait.

There's a lawsuit involving a cable-tv company and I'm on the cable-tv's side?

Does...not...compute

EDIT: And, interestingly, it looks like the way TW is wording their complaint they could win this but be required to only let your TW iPad app work when you're logged into your TW-supplied wifi router in your own home.

That'd be kind of weird, but it's something, I guess.

 

[derek1984]

I have Time Warner and the new WatchESPN app has been AMAZING on my iPhone. I can get ESPN channels over 3G, not just wifi. Almost feels too good to be true. The unlimited data with AT&T even makes it more sweet. Hopefully it will last.

 

[garyTalky]

What the different if I had a Tuner card on a PC. It the same thing as getting it on the IPad.

 

[Small White Car]

What the different if I had a Tuner card on a PC. It the same thing as getting it on the IPad.

Well, Viacom didn't like that either. The difference is that now they finally have the ability do something about it with the iPad whereas before they couldn't stop you.

 

[Drumjim85]

And, interestingly, it looks like the way TW is wording their complaint they could win this but be required to only let your TW iPad app work when you're logged into your TW-supplied wifi router in your own home.

That'd be kind of weird, but it's something, I guess.

I'm pretty sure that's the way the app only worked in the first place.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

Nonsense like this pushes 1 step closer to ditching cable / satellite.

I already have

VIVA LA USENET!1!!

 

[Mjmar]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

Cabelvision app is siq!

 

[Small White Car]

I'm pretty sure that's the way the app only worked in the first place.

I don't have it, but Derek1984 up above me seems to say it's not the way it works right now.

 

[utwarreng]

Time Warner finally doing something that may benefit the general public!? UNPOSSIBLE!

 

[rkzerok]

Irony anyone?

Anyone but me find it ironic that its the content creators trying to keep us from seeing their content however we like?

 

[kiljoy616]

Seems that some one will have to take these old farts kicking and screaming into the future.

Lets hope they win and we can all give them the finger

 

[theOtherGeoff]

At least some companies have a spine. Hope TW wins!

Actually, I don't think you do. Yes, they are the first to bring out an app, but in reality, Viacom wants to cut out the middleman, and sell content directly to you. Middlemen=overhead.

As a non-cable customer, I would rather have Viacom sell their content directly, or strike a deal with a internet pureplay supplier (hulu,netflix,youtube etc) for distribution.

 

[chris200x9]

I already have

VIVA LA USENET!1!!

usenet sucks

 

[Drumjim85]

I don't have it, but Derek1984 up above me seems to say it's not the way it works right now.

He just said that's how the espn app works.

 

[qtx43]

Wait wait wait.

There's a lawsuit involving a cable-tv company and I'm on the cable-tv's side?

Does...not...compute

EDIT: And, interestingly, it looks like the way TW is wording their complaint they could win this but be required to only let your TW iPad app work when you're logged into your TW-supplied wifi router in your own home.

That'd be kind of weird, but it's something, I guess.

Why is that weird? Cable tv is tv viewed in your home. That's what you're paying for. It is not streaming anywhere and everywhere to anybody with your password and internet access.

 

[Small White Car]

Why is that weird? Cable tv is tv viewed in your home. That's what you're paying for. It is not streaming anywhere and everywhere to anybody with your password and internet access.

Weird = Unusual = An iPad app that only works in your house.

How many other apps do that? If there are many I'll withdraw my 'weird.'
I don't know of any others myself.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

I heard about this. It is really useless. You have to be home to use it. But you already have TV in the house. Most people would simply opt for another TV if they watch in another room.

I guess if you need to go to the toilet and a sporting event is on it would come in handy but then again you can just pause it.

 

[vincenz]

Here's one way to avoid paying those cable bills: don't watch TV. Or better yet, watch only shows and movies that you can readily get for free from umm, less reputable sources on the Internet.

 

[iAshley]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

At least some companies have a spine. Hope TW wins!

Actually, I don't think you do. Yes, they are the first to bring out an app, but in reality, Viacom wants to cut out the middleman, and sell content directly to you. Middlemen=overhead.

As a non-cable customer, I would rather have Viacom sell their content directly, or strike a deal with a internet pureplay supplier (hulu,netflix,youtube etc) for distribution.

Apple would then be the middle man if their content is sold through iTunes.

It would just cut competition

 

[Coleman2010]

I heard about this. It is really useless. You have to be home to use it. But you already have TV in the house. Most people would simply opt for another TV if they watch in another room.

I guess if you need to go to the toilet and a sporting event is on it would come in handy but then again you can just pause it.

I setup one of my Macs as a VPN server so I can get a secure connection to home and watch LiveTV over 3G or WiFi when not at home. It works great.

 

[Small White Car]

I heard about this. It is really useless. You have to be home to use it. But you already have TV in the house.

Most of us own a TV that's too heavy to cary around, I think.