Commercial Broadcasters Showdown in DC Federal Court to Stop Programming Re-Transmitter

Logo of Fox Television Stations (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Same battle, different forum.

 Fox Televisions Stations, Inc., joined by 10 other plaintiffs, has sued Alki David's Aereokiller LLC and FilmOn.TV in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to stop unlicensed online streaming of commercial television programming. The 23-page complaint, Fox Television Stations, Inc. et al v. Aerokiller, LLC et al (Case No. 1:13-cv-00758) alleges copyright infringement.

Similar to the battle waged against Aereo by broadcasters transmitting content over the public airwaves (see "TUOL" posts 5/17/13, 8/14/12), the plaintiffs have thus far fared better against David's five-year-old digital tv streaming companies. According to a post by The Hollywood Reporter's THR, Esq. Web site, a California federal court this year issued an injunction against Aerokiller, finding a likelihood that the company was infringing on broadcasters' copyrighted programming. Last month, however, broadcasters were dealt a setback by a federal appeals court ruling in New York that refused to halt Aereo from retransmitting programming over the Internet.

Barry Diller Sues BarryDriller

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)Pity the docket and courtroom clerks at the United States District Court for the Central District of California, who are trying not to confuse separate Barry Diller and BarryDriller lawsuits.

A little more than a week after a copyright and trademark infringement suit, Fox Television Services, Inc. et al. v. BarryDriller Content Systems Plc (Case No. 12-cv-6921), was filed in the federal court in Los Angeles (see "TUOL" post 8/14/12), along comes Barry Diller v. BarryDriller Content Systems Plc (Case No. 12-cv-7200). Diller, one-time head of Paramount Pictures and Fox and an investor in Aereo, a rival of the defendant that also streams broadcast television signals on Internet-enabled devices, has sued the defendant, which is owned by Alki David, for cybersquatting, alleged violation of his right to publicity, and for trademark abuse under the Lanham Act [15 U.S.C. sec. 1125].

As reported in The Los Angeles Times, THR, Esq. CNN.com and elsewhere, Diller accuses David's company of implying a false endorsement by him by adopting the name "BarryDriller."  The Complaint alleges the defendant is using his name in its business to: "(1) associate their service with Plaintiff and (2) mislead the public into believing that Defendants' service has been judicially sanctioned." The Complaint immodestly refers to the plaintiff as one of the best-known business leaders in the U.S. Diller is asking Judge Margaret M. Morrow for punitive damages and injunctive relief against the Defendant.

The concerned staff of "TUOL" hopes for the sake of the court's personnel that no litigation ensues over the Estate of comedian Phyllis Diller, as "TUOL" already has had its fill-er of Diller & Driller lawsuits.

'Streaming Mad' Fox Files Copyright & Trademark Suit Against BarryDriller

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)An offensive against television streaming services was launched last week in the United States District Court for the Central District of California via a four-count, 17-page complaint, Fox Television Services, Inc. et al. v. BarryDriller Content Systems PLC (Case No. 12-cv-6921), that alleges copyright and trademark infringement.

According to accounts by CNN Money and THR, Esq., the plaintiffs claim the signal of  KTTV, Fox's Los Angeles affiliate, is being streamed by the defendant without permission. The complaint alleges the defendant is capturing live broadcast programming and then copying the programming and streaming it over the Internet where the public may view it on Web-enabled devices.

The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief against the defendant streaming service, which set up shop on August 7 under the aegis of Alki David. BarryDriller charges users $5.95 monthly to transmit the free tv signals to subscribers' personal antennas.

On the East Coast, free tv broadcasters and content owners are waging war against the digital  tv streaming service Aereo (one of whose financial backers is media maven Barry Diller). A New York judge rejected an injunction request against Aereo in a case that turns, in part, on the issue of whether Aereo's one-on-one streaming transmittal to an individual's miniature antenna constitutes public broadcasting.