[mythtv-users] Boxee/Hulu?
Brian Wood
beww at beww.org
Mon Mar 2 15:23:31 UTC 2009
On Monday 02 March 2009 06:29:30 Eric Sharkey wrote:
<deletia>
> The courts are not of one mind here either, but the direction over the
> past 100 years or so seems to be in the direction of forcing
> non-discriminatory policy on businesses whether they want it or not.
> From the civil rights movement to the Americans with Disabilities act,
> "we don't serve your kind here" is an increasingly frowned upon
> position to take. I certainly don't want to equate Boxee with Rosa
> Parks in terms of the overall effect, but the spirit is the same from
> my point of view.
Your mention of the ADA is interesting, because I am aware of several people
who connect their computers to large (over 50") screens due to visual
impairments. Since screens this large are usually thought of as "TV sets" and
not "computer monitors", this could be interpreted as violating HuLu's terms
of service.
Clearly, rules that preclude the visually handicapped from consuming the
content would probably be illegal, and I'd think that if something is legal
for a handicapped person to do it would be legal for anyone else to do as
well.
I think what happened is the Content Providers who insisted on the present
rules did not consider all the consequences of the initial offering, in their
pursuit of what seemed to be easy money. This resulted in a totally idiotic
situation.
I notice there doesn't seem to be a problem with cbs.com. They have better
stuff than HuLu anyway, IMHO.
Here's an interesting question: What if I watch HuLu on my TV set by using a
commercial product that I paid for? Who is violating the terms? Me or the
vendor of the product? I purchased the product and followed the included
instructions, which resulted in HuLu on my TV set, am I breaking the law?
Would the fact that I am using a purchased product be a viable defense?
--
beww
beww at beww.org
More information about the mythtv-users
mailing list