Score sheet: Aereo and FilmOn X versus the broadcasters

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article