270
submitted 11 months ago by fne8w2ah@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] krellor@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago

While not related from a legal standpoint, the use of iPhones and intermediate devices reminds me of a supreme Court case that I wrote a brief about. The crux of it was a steaming service that operated large arrays of micro antenna to pick up over the air content and offer it as streaming services to customers. They uniquely associated individual customers with streams from individual antenna so they could argue that they were not copying the material but merely transmitting it.

I forget the details, but ultimately I believe they lost. It was an interesting case.

[-] Natanael@slrpnk.net 6 points 11 months ago

And SCOTUS did so by introducing a rule it never explained and which has no support in prior law (they're only supposed to rule on ambiguity in law, not to create new rules, that's up to congress instead)

https://www.vox.com/2018/11/7/18073200/aereo

[-] krellor@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

Thanks for the article, it was a fun read. I'll have to go back and re-read the majority opinion because I do remember some interesting analysis on it even if I disagree with the outcome.

this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
270 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

60073 readers
4898 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS