Score sheet: Aereo and FilmOn X versus the broadcasters

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Score sheet: Aereo and FilmOn X versus the broadcasters

Aereo will face the broadcasters accusing it of copyright infringement in the Supreme Court on April 22. But how did the online streaming service and its rival FilmOn X (formerly known as Aereokiller) fare in the lower courts?

The US Supreme Court will hear arguments on Tuesday about whether online TV service Aereo violates broadcasters’ copyrights in ABC v Aereo, a case that has united bitter online streaming rivals and high-tech companies against broadcasters and the White House.

Rival streaming service FilmOn X, which has recently been involved in similar litigation with broadcasters, filed an amicus brief in support of Aereo – despite the past differences its CEO Alki David has had with Aereo funder Barry Driller.

In that brief, the company – formerly known as Aereokiller – argued that Aereo and FilmOn X “further an important government interest by providing access to free over-the-air broadcasting” and that the Second Circuit was correct in concluding that Aereo merely enables private performance. But it said that, alternatively, the Supreme Court should force broadcasters to issue services such as FilmOn X and Aereo with compulsory licenses under Section 111 of the Copyright Act.

Below is a round-up of lower court decisions related to the case.


abc-v-aereo.gif


You can read our preview of oral arguments for ABC v Aereo here and our profile of the lawyers arguing the case here.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Niall Trainor, managing attorney at Hasbro, says brands could boost their business with careful portfolio culling
A decision by the Paris Central Division will lead to more IP work for outside counsel, say sources
Courts are encouraged to deliver judgments within three months of a trial, but that deadline has been missed in several recent cases
Lawyers at Maiwald and Sterne Kessler analyse how patents with claims directed to medical treatments are handled in the US and in Europe
Michael DeVincenzo explains how he and his team convinced the Federal Circuit to find in favour of his client in a patent case against Salesforce
Funders and a litigator explain how litigation funding disclosure requirements could affect their business
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Discussions about whether to seek director reviews can come up frequently with clients, even though actual grant rates are rare
In the latest episode, we discuss why IP firms might be attractive to PE investors and bring you the latest news on submissions for next year’s IP STARS rankings
Back-to-back PE deals for IP firms in recent years show that IP firms are sitting on goldmines, so traditional partnerships should be open to change
Gift this article