

CBS chief says network could go all-Internet if Aereo wins - danso
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57620164-93/cbs-chief-says-network-could-go-all-internet-if-aereo-wins/

======
skywhopper
The headline is very misleading. CBS is threatening to stop broadcasting over
the airwaves and become cable-only, like USA, TNT, TBS, etc. That's a far cry
from "internet-only".

Which is too bad, because my first reaction to the headline was "great, let's
get beyond the broadcast/cable model of television". But moving CBS to cable
will only strengthen the status quo.

Moonves comes across as a whiny, powerless loser in the quotes in this
article. Any time you hear powerful people in a position of strength throwing
a tantrum over interference with their revenue streams by small-time players
with a tiny audience, you can bet it'll be in your best interest to favor the
little guy.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
He said "we could go OTT with CBS." _Over-the-Top Content (OTT) refers to
delivery of video, audio and other media over the Internet without a multiple
system operator being involved in the control or distribution of the content._
[1]

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-
top_content](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-top_content)

~~~
arbitrage
Thanks for the clarification. I thought he was making a reference to World War
I, and the idea of being the first to go over the top meant they would be
mowed down by machine guns.

~~~
gknoy
Can we send Comcast first? ;-)

------
raldi
Once upon a time, the United Nations threatened to leave New York unless the
city allowed diplomats to violate parking regulations with impunity. Giuliani
replied, "Great! Do you know how much that land is worth?"

Similarly, I say to CBS: Fantastic! Imagine all the wonderful things people
will invent to make use of your spectrum.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I have no idea why we haven't already kicked broadcasters off the spectrum and
farmed it out for mobile data. Its far more valuable for 2-way communications
vs Judge Judy.

~~~
Loughla
It's far more valuable to you for 2-way communications vs. Judge Judy.

There are a lot of really quite vocal, really quite elderly people who love,
support and value CBS and the like. The pitch of enhanced communication, in
whatever form, is much less appealing than Wheel of Fortune.

~~~
toomuchtodo
My startup is majority-owned by a broadcaster in a major market :) I'm _very_
familiar with audience demographics.

Sometimes, decisions can't be democratically decided (moving spectrum from
broadcasters to 2-way comms), as opinions ("I want my stories") shouldn't hold
the same weight as facts (spectrum is far too valuable to waste on broadcast).

~~~
Loughla
Valuable is still subjective, and is essentially an opinion. Valuable to who?
Valuable in what way? Free, over-the-air television is still wildly valuable
for many people in rural areas, much more valuable than a paid communications
service.

"Sometimes, decisions can't be democratically. . ." I would love to hear your
thoughts about the CIA story on the front page right now ;).

~~~
toomuchtodo
> "Sometimes, decisions can't be democratically. . ." I would love to hear
> your thoughts about the CIA story on the front page right now ;).

My comment was less about government and more that you can't design/make
decisions by committee.

~~~
sbierwagen
Yes, and Congress _is_ a committee. That's the point of having a parliament.

------
natdempk
> "If the government wants to give them permission to steal our signal, then
> we will come up with some other way to get them our content and so get paid
> for it,"

I can't believe he thinks that capturing a signal they are freely broadcasting
over the air is stealing. That's insane. There's definitely a better way their
argument against Aereo could have been made.

------
oddevan
Yeah, they'd be facing a MAJOR class-action lawsuit from their affiliates
(many of whom are part of not-so-small conglomerates) if they actually
attempted anything like this. I have serious doubts they even have the power
to do this, as much as they want us to believe they do.

~~~
joezydeco
Good point. CBS owns/operates only 16 stations and affiliates with 200 others.

------
sophacles
I hope they do this, and good riddance if they do. The thing we need more of
is old-content companies going out of business. Hopefully they take their
outdated models and rent-seeking, extortionary copyright models with them.

~~~
sounds
I came here to say exactly this. The TV broadcast spectrum has some really
desirable FCC licenses. Imagine if white spaces became the de facto standard
simply because the old-guard broadcast TV companies went cable-TV only ...

The same cable TV that is losing cable-cutters in the US [1] and elsewhere.

[1]
[http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000087239639044379260...](http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390443792604577574901875760374)

------
orangecat
A decade ago CBS said they'd refuse to support HD unless the broadcast flag
was mandated. They're bluffing again, poorly.

------
spindritf
_CBS and other broadcasters are suing Aereo over its service using antenna and
remote DVR technology to let subscribers watch live, local over-the-air
television broadcasts, without making any payments to the creators of the
programming._

...

 _CBS is the parent company of CNET._

You can tell.

Isn't their whole business model built around free tv stuffed with ads? By
very design their consumers do not make any paymnets to the creators of the
programming.

~~~
bluedevil2k
No, their business model is a combination of free TV stuffed with ads and
gouging cable companies for the rights to rebroadcast their shows on cable TV.
If Aereo wins in court, the cable companies will immediately clone Aereo to
get around those rebroadcast fees.

------
Karunamon
I will never understand why the networks are whining so hard about Aereo.
Their content is already FTA and the customers still see advertisements. If
anything, this helps the network since it increases ad penetration!

~~~
joezydeco
Because, as it's been stated before, if Aereo sets a precedent in court that
they do not have to pay retransmission fees the cable/dish companies will stop
paying the networks in a heartbeat.

The networks could care less about Aereo the business but they care DEEPLY
about this court ruling.

~~~
batoure
This is a great point and sums up why this is on the way to the supreme court
at all.

------
jack-r-abbit
I think this whole Aereo case is crap. Those signals are out there in the air
and ready to be grabbed by anyone. Aereo has taken a very interesting approach
to the system but I don't see how that is any different than every subscriber
having their own antenna on their roof connected to their own DVR. This is
just a co-located antennas much like co-located servers.

------
gdilla
Why would CBS care about how people access their junk? They get paid by
advertisers who care about eyeballs. More eyeballs, more money for CBS. Unless
I'm mistaken and the cable bundler services of Time Warner / Comcast pay big
bucks to have CBS in their packages.

~~~
rm999
> Unless I'm mistaken and the cable bundler services of Time Warner / Comcast
> pay big bucks to have CBS in their packages

Yep, in the form of "retransmission fees" paid by the cable companies. CBS
currently makes about 250M dollars a year from these fees, and they project
that'll be up to 2B by 2020: [http://www.deadline.com/2014/02/cbs-chief-
raises-retransmiss...](http://www.deadline.com/2014/02/cbs-chief-raises-
retransmission-revenue-estimate-and-says-aereos-no-threat/)

Of course that projection may be inflated for their own selfish reasons.

~~~
gdilla
wow, talk about easy money.

------
shinratdr
This is just ill-informed big talk. They could never go Internet only and get
both the advertising revenue they currently do, and the government breaks they
currently do.

They would be giving away drastically more than Aereo costs them, and they
know that. Mark my words, even if Aereo becomes wildly popular, this will
never happen.

------
sv123
Is there some Aereo equivalent that I can have at home? Would love a simple
solution to DVR stuff by way of antenna.

~~~
gnoway
It depends on your location, but many places in the US have the big 4 + PBS
available over the air. You just need an antenna capable of picking up the
signal, a tuner capable of decoding it, and some device to record the decoded
signal.

Go here to see what kind of antenna you'd need:
[http://www.antennaweb.org](http://www.antennaweb.org).

For the tuner and recording device, there are several options. I think most
people use a PC + a tuner card + scheduling/recording software like Windows
Media Center or MythTV. I'm using MythTV w/ XBMC as the frontend.

~~~
FedRegister
If you want a device that "just works", Series 2 TiVo devices support
connecting a digital converter box, and Series 3 TiVos support OTA digital
broadcasts out of the box.

------
justinph
I doubt this will happen. CBS owns rights to show the AFC division of the NFL.
It is not in the NFL's interest to reduce it's audience. The NFL is a HUGE
money maker for CBS and other networks that cary games.

~~~
bluedino
CBS also has the worst NFL presentation. Their broadcasters and production
quality is so far behind Fox and NBC, not to mention ESPN.

------
001sky
That spectrum will be worth a bunch of money, no?

