<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The Fight To Lower Your Cable Bill: Online Live Streaming Television In Jeopardy	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://systembash.com/the-fight-to-lower-your-cable-bill-online-live-streaming-television-in-jeopardy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://systembash.com/the-fight-to-lower-your-cable-bill-online-live-streaming-television-in-jeopardy/</link>
	<description>Technology and System Administration</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:43:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: drmlgcc		</title>
		<link>https://systembash.com/the-fight-to-lower-your-cable-bill-online-live-streaming-television-in-jeopardy/#comment-41973</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[drmlgcc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://systembash.com/?p=1059#comment-41973</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[ivi.tv&#039;s situation seems dire, indeed. But there are other companies out there with a more legal take on streaming tv, and i think it is indicative of a trend towards consumers getting their content via streaming sources, and content providers slowly, but surely, recognizing this trend, and forming more appropriate solutions to the increasing demand for online content.

 byron allen&#039;s Smart.TV recently released half-a-dozen apps that provide both video-on-demand and streaming live video on a variety of subjects - apps like &#039;comedy.tv&#039;, &#039;pets.tv&#039;, and &#039;recipe.tv&#039; are helping lead the way for media companies to embrace the emergence of a solid streaming media market. and there&#039;s companies like Mediafly, who are providing more and more businesses with an easy way to stream their multimedia content to consumers...

i cant say im really surprised ivi.tv is getting sued, it seems kind of similar to the recent ninjavideo lawsuit. it would be one thing if there was no charge for the content, and the ivi folks weren&#039;t making money off their product. If that was the case, sympathy for their situation could be warranted. but if they&#039;re just ripping other people&#039;s content, and then selling it, it becomes a less admirable effort...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ivi.tv&#8217;s situation seems dire, indeed. But there are other companies out there with a more legal take on streaming tv, and i think it is indicative of a trend towards consumers getting their content via streaming sources, and content providers slowly, but surely, recognizing this trend, and forming more appropriate solutions to the increasing demand for online content.</p>
<p> byron allen&#8217;s Smart.TV recently released half-a-dozen apps that provide both video-on-demand and streaming live video on a variety of subjects &#8211; apps like &#8216;comedy.tv&#8217;, &#8216;pets.tv&#8217;, and &#8216;recipe.tv&#8217; are helping lead the way for media companies to embrace the emergence of a solid streaming media market. and there&#8217;s companies like Mediafly, who are providing more and more businesses with an easy way to stream their multimedia content to consumers&#8230;</p>
<p>i cant say im really surprised ivi.tv is getting sued, it seems kind of similar to the recent ninjavideo lawsuit. it would be one thing if there was no charge for the content, and the ivi folks weren&#8217;t making money off their product. If that was the case, sympathy for their situation could be warranted. but if they&#8217;re just ripping other people&#8217;s content, and then selling it, it becomes a less admirable effort&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
