Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Australia Cloud Television

Court Ruling Shuts Down Australian Cloud TV Recorders 46

Posted by Soulskill
from the shut-down-down-under dept.
joshgnosis writes "In the wake of an Australian Federal Court ruling last month that free-to-air TV recording app Optus TV Now was infringing on the copyright of some of the country's biggest sports broadcasts, two other services — Beem and MyTVR have also been forced to suspend their services. Beem lashed out at the ruling, telling customers that their rights had been 'diminished' by the judgment and rights owners were 'scared' of cloud-based TV recording services in the same way they once were of VCRs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Court Ruling Shuts Down Australian Cloud TV Recorders

Comments Filter:
  • I'm a confirmed geek, an Australian, I love good TV and I've barely heard of these services. I get the feeling that this is a publicity grab.
    • by Rasperin (1034758)
      If it is a publicity grab, it went seriously south. Unless this get's reversed their companies are illegal.
  • They should shut down Schwarzeneggers latest movie [yahoo.com] instead. So criminally bad it should be suspended, with force.

  • by thrill12 (711899) on Friday May 25, 2012 @03:14PM (#40112091) Journal
    ...but I guess this fit's right in the studio's (TV ones...) idea of keeping control of whatever they produce.
    There is no real reason cloud recording isn't a perfectly valid, legal way to record stuff where even the owners could benefit. But no, judges intervene based on old laws and politics take a while to catch up and realize it is not 1980 anymore.
    Wake up people, the new world is coming, and floating out of the window before you know it.
    • by BSAtHome (455370) on Friday May 25, 2012 @03:19PM (#40112155)

      It is called fear and consumption. The way to control; be it media or politics (what is the difference?).

      You are only allowed to consume. Consume what we tell you, how we tell you, when we tell you. Or else! The world will come to s standstill and judgement day will be upon us. Do as I tell you when I tell you how I tell you.

      • Naw, not so much. Consumers always vote with their wallets on issues like this. It still needs to get sorted, but it will. You can only tell your consumer what, when, and how much only so long. This is why betamax and cds are no longer available. Do you really think the labels would have given up on the cd cash machine if their power was as great as you say?
    • by BlueStrat (756137)

      There is no real reason cloud recording isn't a perfectly valid, legal way to record stuff where even the owners could benefit. But no, judges intervene based on old laws and politics take a while to catch up and realize it is not 1980 anymore.
      Wake up people, the new world is coming, and floating out of the window before you know it.

      [bigcontent/media+lawyers}

      PULL!!

      [/bigcontent/media+lawyers}

      Strat

  • It always wins in court over rights of the little guy
    • Telstra and the AFL, the "big guys", beat Optus, the "little" guys. Both are large telco players: this was a Goliath v Goliath match in court... but only the little guys that the big guys did not feel threatened by, Beem and MyTVR, are going to go out of business as a result.

  • this is a good thing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 25, 2012 @03:22PM (#40112203)

    I have no problem with individuals recording stuff. But the moment business profits from creating infringing copies, fuck 'em.

    The "cloud" is not innovation. It is regression and loss of control, all the way to IBM '60s mainframes. Although not intended, government measures which make the cloud less attractive and encourage us to decentralise and retain control of information are doing us a favour.

    • I'm allowed to make a copy in my own home, with my equipment, for my personal use.

      Assuming I'm still paying for my subscription, can I pay someone else to make a copy for me using _my_ equipment in _my_ home?
      Can I pay someone else to make a copy for me using _their_ equipment in _my_ home?
      Can I pay someone else to make a copy for me using _their_ equipment in _their_ building?

      If any of these are acceptable, it's hard to see why they aren't all acceptable.

      Around here it's like making your own wine. I'm allo

    • by Lumpy (12016)

      "I have no problem with individuals recording stuff. But the moment business profits from creating infringing copies, fuck 'em."

      So you are behind the destruction of the TiVo company?

      They profit monthly from people stealing copyright at home. In fact some of the peopel at home with tivo's go as far as watching the TV show MULTIPLE TIMES and even skip the commercials.

      Utterly vile people, but TiVo makes a tidy profit off of the monthly fees to keep the boxes working. They should be shut down as well!

    • Panasonic and Sony profited from selling tapes as well. It's the same old argument recycled.
      This will of course simply move more well-intended people to torrenting, sans ads. Media companies should finally realize that the days of dictating when people enjoy content are over.

    • by tqk (413719)

      The "cloud" is not innovation. It is regression and loss of control, all the way to IBM '60s mainframes. Although not intended, government measures which make the cloud less attractive and encourage us to decentralise and retain control of information are doing us a favour.

      I'm no fan of cloud computing, for the same reasons you state, but you're stretching it with this. If you were consistent, you'd say nobody should be able to hire anyone to do anything for you. Make your own music, reno your own kitchen, do your own plumbing, ...

      That's just foolish. Infringing copies? It's over the air broadcast. How dare anyone stick their nose into how I deal with an over the air broadcast?!? If I can make a copy of it on a VCR, why can't I save it to a remote hard drive that I rent

  • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Friday May 25, 2012 @03:26PM (#40112233)

    Asking a website (example: hulu) to record a show for you is no different than asking your VCR or DVR to record a show for you. In fact it's probably better (for ABC, NBC, etc) because you can't fast-forward through the commercials.

    • by cpu6502 (1960974)

      P.S. And the rule forbidding the company from same-time broadcasting local TV over cellphones is even more stupid.....

  • by holophrastic (221104) on Friday May 25, 2012 @03:26PM (#40112235)

    It would seem that argument is long dead. Looks like they were right to fear VCRs. It may have taken quite a while, but a this point, the VCR certainly did lead to DVR, PVR, and ad skipping in general.

    • by cpu6502 (1960974)

      Yeah but they also led to a huge home-based industry for current and old movies. Just to pick a random studio: MGM made a bundle off sales of VHS tapes of its long-forgotten, rarely-seen 1930s,40s,50s titles. If Hollywood had succeeeded in outlawing VCRs, they'd all be a lot poorer.

      • by idontgno (624372)

        If Hollywood had succeeeded in outlawing VCRs, they'd all be a lot poorer.

        Nonsense. You don't have the proper perspective.

        Outlaw VCRs. Mandate VCPs (Videocassette Players). Sell pre-recorded videos. Never let anyone record anything over-the-air or tape-to-tape.* Profit!

        *Yes, this means that the only kind of video recording authorized in the hands of the little people would be home video cameras, and those would be prohibited from any technical capability to record anything except what comes through the le

        • by Dogtanian (588974)
          This assumes that people would have been willing to pay the same (or very close) for a playback-only videocassette machine instead of one that could record. I doubt removing the latter facility would have decreased the cost by that much.

          Remember that when they first came out, home video recorders were very expensive by modern standards, and in part it was probably the mass market that helped to drive the price down in the first place. Chicken and egg. A playback-only machine, even if marginally cheaper, w
          • by drinkypoo (153816)

            That's not what's wrong with the idea at all. Many early VCRs didn't record, they were VCPs... because for many years a VCR head was the most complex device in the average household, and the VCR therefore by far the most complex device — even a VCP was. And DVDs were effectively read-only for quite a while, as far as the average public is concerned, and while many old people bought DVD recorders on the assumption that they would want to treat them like a VCR, in practice the cable companies gave them

            • by Dogtanian (588974)

              That's not what's wrong with the idea at all. Many early VCRs didn't record, they were VCPs...

              I might be wrong, but I'm not aware of player-only machines having been a significant percentage of the market, at least not when the mass market was taking off in the late 70s. I'd have thought that- aside from the fact that the mechanics would be almost the same- that the technology required to create a playback-only head would be only marginally less complex than one that could record.

              DVD players aren't as good a comparison because they were *much* cheaper than late-70s/early-80s VCRs (in real terms) d

      • by VFA (1064176)
        I think you are confusing Video Cassette Recorder with Video Cassette Player in your argument. Hollywood wanted to kill the recording aspect of VCRs, they'd be perfectly happy to allow another technology to play crap they produce. Just sayin'...
      • by whoever57 (658626)

        If Hollywood had succeeeded in outlawing VCRs, they'd all be a lot poorer.

        I am going against conventional wisdom, but what if Sony had lost the crucial case, but then gone on to produce a VCPlayer? There might have been a chicken-and-egg problem -- without the content (recording OTA broadcasts), there would be no reason to buy such a player and without a maket for the cassettes, there would be no reason to offer the content on cassettes.

        The counter example is the DVD player, which did not have the same

        • by cpu6502 (1960974)

          70s-era videorecords (CEDs) were not really successful either. People wanted to record primetime shows when away from home.

  • this site does the same thing. one nice thing i enjoy about this site is the mobile app that lets me broadcast to my channel directly from my phone. so if i'm videotaping the police shooting at my black neighbors and they confiscate the phone, 1) there's no video files to copy or delete and 2) the video is already showing live to viewers of the channel, and recorded by the justin.tv site itself. i can login from any computer and rebroadcast or retrieve my video.
  • Australia sucks. Your women are welcome to venture over to the USA, though :).
    • by tqk (413719)

      Australia sucks. Your women are welcome to venture over to the USA, though

      The USA's media barons are the ones exporting this insanity to other countries. I'll be happy to spit in your face for allowing that to happen. Fix your government.

"Indecision is the basis of flexibility" -- button at a Science Fiction convention.

Working...