MLB Says Slingbox Illegal, CEA Thinks Otherwise 234
The Tie Guy writes "Sling Media's Slingbox allows consumers to watch and control their home television programs from a remote PC or smartphone — a process called 'placeshifting'. Content owners are typically edgy when it comes to the placeshifting topic. However, most don't view Slingbox as an imminent threat that will destroy the commercial broadcast model. Major League Baseball is going against the grain by saying that Slingbox owners who stream home games while traveling are breaking the law because it allows consumers to circumvent geographical boundaries written in to broadcast deals. This has sparked a huge debate that has the MLB, baseball fans, and the CEA up in arms. CEA President Gary Shapiro doesn't agree, and is coming to the defense of Sling Media and place-shifting in general."
the solution (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Question is Backwards (Score:2)
What you meant to ask was, "How may baseball nuts are go insane about their team that they'll invest in a Slingbox and put up with the pile of geekery, just to get their fix?"
Actually Slingbox isn't all that geeky - a friend had a unit he couldn't get working and tech support told him it was incompatible with switches, that he had to use only a hub to plug it in. He even
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Question is Backwards (Score:5, Interesting)
You've got your idiots, and you've got your corporate ladder climbers. I used to do phone support for a reseller and the only metric tracked was call time and calls handled. A certain one of our techs, let's call him Corman, would pick up a call, listen to the story, and say, "I'm sorry, ma'am, that issue is beyond the level we handle here - you'll have to call the manufacturer. If he was just back from Venezuela that day he'd even look up the number for them.
The customer, not so dumb, would call back into the queue and wait for one of the rest of us to pick up and solve their problems.
Guess which tech had the best performance scores?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
*head explodes with copyright violation possibilities*
On TV, sure... (Score:2)
I guess I'll just have to quit watching baseball games. Oh wait I find the sport boring and asinine and don't watch it anyways.
Baseball is something to experience in person, or not at all. Being out at the park on a fine day is good times. If the sport itself is slow at times, that's mitigated by the fact that you're there enjoying nice weather and the company of friends, plus the social activity of cheering for your team.
'Course, I'd love to add "good food and drink" to the list, but frankly the stuff they serve at the park is overpriced garbage - "sex in a canoe"-type beer and dried-up cold sausage - and under the pretense of
Re: (Score:2)
Baseball is the only game more boring to watch on TV than golf, and that is saying something.
Re:the solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is not actually the main problem.
Plenty of fans are happy to pay MLB for their internet streaming video service, because it ostensibly offers every game, every day, unlike your typical cable company which only has the local teams and a few other stations.
The problems start because MLB's streaming service "blacks out" any games that MLB deems to be close enough for the fan to watch in person, or watch on local television. And this subset of games almost never coincides with the games that the fan d
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience. Any other use of this telecast or of any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent, is prohibited.
That's from Wendy's Blog. [seltzer.org] It took 5 days for that to be DMCA'd off youtube.
The MLB warning is:
This copyrighted telecast is presented by authority of the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball [or Sterling Mets]. I
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Or is it just their accounts and descriptions that you cannot disseminate?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a baseball fan, but MLB have broken me now. First there's the MLB.TV thing. Blue Jays are blacked out for me. I am over 2000 miles away from Toronto! Somehow I'm claimed as a local market though... Strike 1.
MLB.TV, despite costing $20 a month, now includes commercials from what I've heard. Also, if you get MLB.TV and want to cancel, they make it deliberately dif
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should consumers abide by or even care about an agreement between the MLB and the broadcaster? The consumer didn't sign any contracts to "only watch baseball in approved geographical regions." And in any case, the user obviously has a presence in the necessary region in order to use SlingBox in the first place.
Re:Obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
Because after the MLB and broadcaster come to an agreement, they go arm-in-arm to the Federal Government with stories about the "theft" of their "intellectual property". Lather, rinse, repeat for a decade or two and you get a situation where you can no longer use your own devices to pick up the signals shooting all around (and through) you. You will be *presumed *forbidden from doing anything with radio waves until you jump through a few hoops, i.e. discovering whether anyone claims to "own" those waves and what they'll allow you to do with them.
This is the logical conclusion of the argument "it's their content, they can dictate what you do with it"
Re:Obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
Make the case that their MLB friends are screwing up their add campaign. If you can't fight Goliath, pit him against the cyclops.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've given up on them because of the efforts they go to in order to keep consumers from watching their games on television.
Before, we had the package on Dish Network to watch the out of market games. But this year, MLB granted exclusive rights for the package to DirectTV. At the last minute, or after the last minute, they did allow some big cable conglomerate access as well.
But the Dish Network subscribers were left on their own. The choices are either to not watch
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Obvious question (Score:5, Interesting)
Legally, they don't have to. They can receive the broadcast anywhere they can legally receive it.
And they can legally timeshift it by recording it to, say, a videotape. And they can legally take that physical video tape anywhere they want and watch it.
Placeshifting probably ought to be equally legal, but there is a lot less clear case law on it that I am aware of, and in the absence of clear case law, MLB probably has a colorable (though, IMO, wrong) claim that placeshifting is a violation of copyright. The fact that it enables violation of the distribution agreement isn't the basis of the claim of illegality, but it is part of the basis for the claim of damages stemming from the illegality.
More Obvious Question (Score:4, Informative)
This summary is missing a critical piece of information.
Re: (Score:2)
Nor does the consumer sign any contract with regard to use of GPL software. Absent a contract I would think that "what is allowed" reduces to "what is allowed by law." Maybe MLB is just informing its viewers of the law (so they can't claim ignorance), or perhaps they are stretching the law through a questionable interpretation.
Is the law for baseball (or sporting events in general) different than for other broadcast material? I don't know, but I would not be surp
Re:Obvious question (Score:4, Informative)
First off, "wrap" agreements have been legally accepted by courts for a long time. So including a license with your software is technically binding if the software is used.
That being said, you are not bound by the GPL. Read it sometime. It explicitly says you're not bound by it. The only time you're bound by it is if you want the redistrubtion rights that copyright law does not offer. Without the GPL, you cannot redistribute the software. So redistribution is either an implicit agreement to the terms or a violation of copyright law. Take your pick.
Courts have already thrown out arguments against time shifting and space shifting. This is just another form of space shifting. Plus the FCC provides that anything sent over the airwaves cannot be restricted. If it's on the airwaves, it's public property. That doesn't mean that you can redistribute the material (that's where copyright law kicks in), but the airwaves are a single instance of a free distribution to all.
Long story short: MLB doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.
Oops (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oops (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know, haven't read it. For all I know, it might state that the moon is made of cheese and that I agree to not take a bite. WTF does one party's statement of opinion have to do with what another party has agreed to?
By reading this post, you agree to give me a pint of Bridgeport IPA.
This is the same thing as DVD region coding (Score:2)
MLB is using copyright laws to enforce their marketing agreements. Whether it's legally sound or not, I guess we'll find out if this gets as far as a court case, but it's certainly not very customer-centric.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well then, I am going to use sodomy laws to complain about Microsoft's deceptive marketing practices in regards to security. In both cases, it sounds good, but it's worthless legally. Copyright laws prevent me from making additional copies of the content and distributing them to others. My own copy is only subject to property laws - as MY property that is illegal for MLB or anyone else to muck with.
Not your property. (Score:2)
At least in the MS 'security' case, you have the fact of getting it in the shorts to justify calling it sodomy.
Re: (Score:2)
So which laws am I breaking? I didn't sign any contracts with MLB. They have provided me with a copy of the video voluntarily. I am not giving away copies of the video to other people. Sure wouldn't be copyright law at least.
Okay. I'l l be the first to ask... (Score:5, Insightful)
Consumer Electronics Association (Score:5, Informative)
Would it have been so hard to actually type (or cut-n-paste) what CEA stands for into the blurb? I couldn't guess WTF it was, an NGO like the BBB, CCC, NAA, or ANA, or more like the FBI, FTC, or GAO.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Consumer Electronics Association (Score:5, Funny)
PSP + PS3 does the same thing (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Fair Use (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also no wonder that the more the content industry tightens the screws (no fast forwarding now through commercials, let alone 30-second skip, on new programming) that the more people turn to alternative methods (e.g. BitTorrent) for getting their content, and the ability to watch it, as they desire.
Silly people who never took physics (Score:3, Funny)
You don't have to declare it, it's already been decided. The courts have already determined that Fair Use includes the right to timeshift. However, Special Relativity tells us that time and space are actually the same thing, and your perception of how the two relate to each other depends on your velocity. So timeshifting in one reference frame is placeshifting in another. Ergo if fair use grants us the right to timeshift, it also grants us the right
Its funny (Score:5, Informative)
But somehow I don't remember signing a broadcast agreement with Major League Baseball. Either place shifting is legal or not. MLB's agreements with its broadcasters should have absolutely no bearing on this at all.
You play in our parks.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What I do with the airwaves/cable that comes into my home is my own damn business as long as I'm not throwing it up on YT or BT. (And even then, as someone mentioned, you would think they would be grateful ANYONE was watching any more). If I want to timeshift, placeshift, or even print out the individual frames, place them on a wooden coffee table, take a digital photo of that, assemble all of those BACK into an mpeg-4 stream and have THAT 'slung' to my laptop
When Did I Sign That? (Score:3, Insightful)
. . . Slingbox owners who stream home games while traveling are breaking the law because it allows consumers to circumvent geographical boundaries written in to broadcast deals.
Did I sign a broadcaster agreement? No? Then shut up.
History Repeating (Score:2)
Reminds me of when (cassette) tape to tape desks became common and people started doing their own compilati
Breaking Geographical Boundaries (Score:5, Insightful)
Slingbox simply automates a process that has been done the old fashioned way since the advent of the home VCR. It's better. It's nicer. It's far more consumer friendly, but it's essentially the same thing!
The unfortunate problem is that the courts tend to be anal about these things. A court ruled recently that while it's legal for the cable company to rent you a DVR and place it next to your television set, it's illegal for them to move the DVR functionality to their own servers and send you the program on demand over the cable in a way that looks the same as though you'd recorded it yourself. It's the same d@mn thing in every regard except in the eyes of some dumb judge.
The courts seem to need to inspect (meddle in) every little piece of technological progress and nitpick reasons why this isn't legal, although the same functionality implemented in an earlier was was completely legal. Just how far away from your TV set will this judge allow your legal DVR to be placed before it becomes illegal. That's what I'd like to know.
Of course, I'll bet that the moment Sling Media is ready to hand over a substantial wad of cash to MLB for providing this functionality to their fans, that MLB will have no problems with it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
It certainly enables you to do that, yes.
No. Because making the recording is legal, so the fact that it causes MLB harm doesn't give them a cause of action. Their argument here is that "placeshifting" by retransmitting over the internet is a violation of copyright (I think they are wrong, but I don't think the case law is clear on that so that it is as certain as a matte
Placeshifting vs. Timeshifting seems backwards... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not saying it should sense. I'm saying that, AFAIK, there is fairly clear case law on the latter, the case law is not as clear on the former, and while intuitively I think that placeshifting ought to be considered at least as much "fair use" as timeshifting, the courts might well disagree.
Maybe, maybe not. It incr
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but I disagree with the MLB's assessment of this. It all comes down to
Re: (Score:2)
Except that with Slingbox, I can actually watch events live. I am a Giants fan in the Bay Area, and let's say I have Slingbox. If I am in Nebraska I can use my Slingbox and watch the game LIVE. MLB wants me to find a bar with MLB Extra Innings to watch the game.
I am not saying it is right or wrong, bu
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully this never happens, because all sports leagues will come out of the woodwork and sue SlingMedia because they all sports packages too and if you have a friend that will set up a slingbox for you in the city of your favorite team, you can avoid purchasing NHL Center Ice, NBA League Pass, **NFL SUNDAY TIC
Re: (Score:2)
In this case though, I agree that there is no reason for MLB to be in a hissy fit. The people that a
Re: (Score:2)
Not knowing the specifics of the cas
The way I see it (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Their agreement is between MLB and broadcasters. The people watching it aren't even part of the agreement. The broadcasters broadcasted the media in the consumers area, and the consumer watched it. They just choose to watch it some place other than their own home.
If you ever listen to the beginning of a MLB broadcast (or NFL or many other sports) one part of the leagaleze they spew is something like "no rebroadcast or retransmit allowed without written permission of MLB". I wonder if they are considering the slingbox in violation of that, since it is essentially retransmitting the video from your home to wherever you might have gone. Seems weak, and probably would not hold up in court, since the language is obviously aimed at keeping people from recording and rese
timeshifting + placeshifting = rampant piracy (Score:2)
Record the entire broadcast stream, and then operate a kind of private Video on Demand service based on all of the content that has been broadcast in the past N years. All you need is some cheapo commodity disk and some softwa
Re: (Score:2)
You're entitled to watch the stream, because you recorded it. And you're entitled to show it to other people if you're watching it, so long as they're not paying you money to be there or anything similar. But to send the stream to someone else is to m
Re: (Score:2)
MLB is authoritating itself into obscurity (Score:5, Interesting)
I live in MN, but I'm a Brewers fan. This is quite unfortunate since it makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to watch Brewers games. My satellite provider will only let me watch Twins games (something i would have to pay extra for), but MLB has my MN zip code in the "blackout area" for the Brewers and Twins, so I can't watch games online through mlb.tv either.
Last year I paid ~$200 for something called MLB Season Ticket just to watch brewers games on satellite. This year it's not available.
I wrote an email to blackout@mlb.com explaining the situation, but the response was essentially "too bad, you're blacked out".
I think this strategy of milking advertising pennies is only hurting MLB in the long run since I doubt they will maintain younger fans now that its so hard to get their video content. Turning down my money and alienating fans like me probably isn't that wise for the short-run either.
Anti-Trust Exemption (Score:2)
That's what you get when you legislate anti-trust exemptions into law.
Re: (Score:2)
Last year I paid ~$200 for something called MLB Season Ticket just to watch brewers games on satellite. This year it's not available."
Actually it is called MLB
Re: (Score:2)
This was true up until this year. MLB signed a sort of exclusive deal with DirecTV that ended up forcing other providers to match DirecTV's price. Dish wanted to negotiate their own rates and did not want to pay what DirecTV was offering.
Re: (Score:2)
This was true up until this year. MLB signed a sort of exclusive deal with DirecTV that ended up forcing other providers to match DirecTV's price. Dish wanted to negotiate their own rates and did not want to pay what DirecTV was offering. MLB would not budge (at least according to Dish Network). Read more about it here [dishnetwork.com]."
Ah, I see, well dude needs to switch to DirecTV to watch the Brew Crew then.
Re:MLB is authoritating itself into obscurity (Score:5, Insightful)
I live in Oregon, in any area 500 miles away from the team I grew up with and love, the A's. So I haven't the brilliant luxury of hopping in my Yugo to cruise to the ballpark and put myself in one of the Coliseum's seats. Nor can I do so to hit a Giants game. Or a Mariners game, in Seattle.
But, Major League Baseball, in their blinding genius, has designated my region not only Seattle Mariners "Home" territory (which I can half accept; even though they're 300 miles away from me), but also Oakland Athletics AND San Francisco Giants "Home" territory. Hence, even though I'm paying their ass for MLB-TV service, I'm blacked out. For all three teams.
The other news is this: I don't have cable TV. I don't want cable TV. I don't need cable TV. And I won't pay for something I don't want. And I certainly won't pay for something by virtue of someone else telling me I must just to get a single element of content, wasting the rest. But it gets even better: I couldn't get A's baseball through my local cable carrier even if I was willing to pay for it! This is the Northwest; Seattle Mariners territory. I haven't interest in watching Seattle Mariners baseball on television. Given recent years, they'd have to pay ME to do that...
This is a serious issue with me; one that I harbor scathing anger at MLB for. The management individuals of Major League Baseball are pin headed dolts who neither respect the honor of the game nor the loyal fans who support it, and for that, I have zero respect for them. Zero. Hellfire and scorn to them for what they've done to the game, and to the loyal fans willing to PAY them for honest, live game coverage in regions any fucktard would agree is out of logical market.
Woe, I hate them...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Breaking a contract I didn't sign..... (Score:2)
Motives are clear (Score:5, Interesting)
Suddenly it makes sense (Score:3, Insightful)
No it doesn't (Score:3, Informative)
economics of blackouts (Score:2)
Broadcast blackouts only benefit MLB if local broadcasting would detract from attendance at games. Would that really happen? I don't follow baseball, but from what I know, there are lots of people who find it more exciting to go to the stadium than to watch on TV, so unless the stadium prices are so high as to keep the fans away, local broadcasting would not have any impact on their stadium income. Am I wrong about this? Does MLB even have a real economic incentive to block local broadcasting?
RIAA all over again (Score:2, Informative)
We should not be l
*ring*ring* (Score:2, Funny)
Hey man, its Bob.
(Hi Bob)
Hey, you at home?
(yeah)
You got the game on?
(yeah)
Whats the score?
(can't tell you)
What? C'mon man, you watching it or not?
(yeah, I'm watching it)
Well, tell me what the score is.
(OOoo, hold on....)
(Wow, great play)
Who's at bat?
(Can't tell you)
.
.
Ad Nauseum
Seriously. Draw a fucking line. Get a grip. Evolve with the times or die, you broadcast based dinosaurs, instead of fighting ridiculous fucking battles to raise your stock price until you can retire and pull the chord on you
How to make the MLB shut up: (Score:2)
These broadcast agreements are dumb (Score:2)
So I got my
Re: (Score:2)
Same old crappy UI metaphor (Score:2)
I know it's easy and obvious and portable, but that UI metaphor drives me crazy. Any software with an on-screen "remote control" goes straight in the virtual shitcan, unless every single button on it has a keyboard equivalent.
1's and 0's (Score:2)
Anybody who tries to control digital content first ought to know that 1s and 0s do not know the meaning of geographical boundaries. If it can be represented by 1s and 0s, then any device instructed to know what said numbers mean will carry them.
what cast? (Score:2)
What about unicast deals? MLB doesn't have those? That's the end of that then, I guess.
MLB needs to let this one go (Score:2)
Like the 30 second commercial segment, it was a nice idea that has had its day. Chasing after slingboxes in order to protect blackouts is no less foolish than outlawing the 30 second skip button in order to protect viability of commercials.
Because they can't be bothered to change, these people think that entire markets and technologies must be restrained, inhibited, crippled or destroyed. Fuc
Re: (Score:2)
Key Word: (Score:2)
Enforcement by GPS in the receiver (Score:2)
Obviously, what MLB would like is a GPS unit in the receiver to enforce their area restrictions.
Like this. [kvh.com]
Yes, the DirecTV receivers for mobile use have an "Integrated GPS ... to automatically enable local channels while in your home designated market area". Cross the area boundary and your TV reception cuts off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You see, that's why slingbox and a portable satellite internet receiver would be a much better solution. If those receivers detected where you were and guaranteed that you would have national network service when you didn't have local service, and guaranteed that you would have local service in any city where local channels were available, it might not be so offensive, but with it cutting off access to your network channels outside your home area, that's just asking to be cracked.
I'd probably start with
One more nail in the coffin (Score:4, Insightful)
The MLB has *really* jumped the shark on this one though.
Re: (Score:2)
Propoganda Control (Score:2)
In the States, we pull our information primarily from one of four major networks. Imagine how much more difficult it would be to manage propog
This isn't about consumers. (Score:3, Insightful)
By their logic. . . (Score:2)
Screw MLB. I now have yet another reason to be totally disinterested in professional baseball.
I never signed any deal with the MLB... (Score:3, Insightful)
And since, unlike murder, I personally am not committing any crime or license violation (for any license that I have agreed to,) there is no illegality here for me personally. MLB is out of luck on this one.
Dear Major League Baseball.. (Score:2)
Nobody cares about "geographic boundaries".. and certainly not the nerds using Slingbox. MmmHmm.
Didn't you lose enough "customers", I mean "fans" after the last baseball strike to learn that you guys suck? In the words of something from the '70's. "Keep On Sucking!" You've just found a new way to alienate the possible few fans you do have.
"Broadcast" deals.... (Score:2)
The content is shifted in a private connection between the Sling server in a person's home and the Sling player on their remote PC.
This isn't like a podcast, where the files are out there for download by anyone.
Nor is it like streaming audio via Icecast or something like that where anyone can tune in up to the system's connection limits.
There are exactly two discrete endpoints here. Slingbox and the Slingbox's owner.
MLB has it's head up it's @ss. (Score:3, Insightful)
Next thing you know they will try to arrest someone for video taping a game in a legal location then taking that tape to a blocked location and viewing it there.
Re: (Score:2)
A slightly paranoid individual might suggest that the scandals were invented out of whole cloth in order to drum up some interest in their boring-ass sport.
The decline of baseball explains the rise of popularity in NASCAR, though. Baseball is fucking boring. So is watchi