I subscribe to Simple.TV because I bought a closeout unit with a lifetime subscription included. The service works pretty well, making it easy to find upcoming shows (via local over-the-air TV) to record to the USB drive I plugged into my device, then letting me stream those recordings back to me anywhere on the internet.

This morning, Simple.TV emailed me a request to take a short survey. The survey included the usual satisfaction stuff, such as what I like about it and what features I’d like to add. You know, the usual. Then near the end of the survey came a surprising statement and question: “We are considering offering an optional ‘hosted’ service, to improve your Simple.TV experience. … Would you consider having your Simple.TV ‘hosted’ in a secure location, to give you high-quality streaming of ALL the TV channels in your local area?”

Wow! The only way that Simple.TV could legally offer such a service, as far as I know, would be to set it up just like Aereo, the streaming TV service whose fate awaits a Supreme Court ruling in a month or so. Simple.TV appears to be signalling that if Aereo wins, Simple.TV might jump in as a competitor. I wonder if there are any other potential competitors (besides FilmOn) that are just waiting to get started.

Earlier this year, our old friend NimbleTV added service from several cable systems in India. Since CEO Anand Subramanian is from Bombay, I always figured that was NimbleTV’s primary goal, and from what I can tell, it’s a strong competitor to DishWorld’s packages for Hindi and other Indian languages.

Then some time last month, NimbleTV quietly introduced a free tier* of US-based, English-language channels. (Of course, NimbleTV does almost everything quietly.) The most remarkable of these is New York superstation WPIX and its two digital over-the-air sub-channels, which carry This TV and Antenna TV. Since these are the only OTA channels included, and since NimbleTV has always stressed paying for its content, I’d guess that NimbleTV must have worked a deal with WPIX.

This could be a milestone in the history of television. WPIX went on the air in 1948. It later became known as the TV home for Yankees baseball games and was distributed via satellite in 1978 as one of the first superstations. As one of the five federally recognized superstations, WPIX is still carried via satellite to Dish Network subscribers across the US and to Bell TV subscribers in Canada. Now WPIX might be the first major OTA station to sanction full-time internet-based delivery of its signals. Assuming again that WPIX sanctioned all of this.

There are a few drawbacks and oddities to NimbleTV’s free tier. The main handicap is the lack of recording ability. Viewers get to watch any channel live, and that’s it. All of the record buttons are still in place, but attempts to use them only prompt suggestions to upgrade. The strangest part of the tier is NimbleTV’s numbering scheme. Bloomberg is shown as 7012, WPIX is 7030, and the other 13 channels are numbered consecutively 7032-7044. That doesn’t match the numbering from any other source, so I think it marks the first time that NimbleTV invented its own numbers. If you know anything about it, such as what was supposed to be Channel 7031, please leave a comment to let us know.

Another nice benefit of the (presumed) WPIX deal is that those channels were added to my basic $30/month plan, based mostly on Dish’s Welcome Pack. I presume that they were also added to NimbleTV’s higher levels of service, corresponding roughly to Dish’s Top 120 and Top 200. Those channels might even be available to subscribers who don’t get Dish’s NYC broadcast channels set, which includes WPIX but not This, Antenna or any other sub-channel.

As a way to introduce prospective customers to NimbleTV’s innovative service, this seems like a smart idea. For any viewer interested in checking out these channels, I can’t see any downside. Click the link and go for it!

Update: Thanks to a tip from a commenter here, I see the WPIX is now gone from NimbleTV’s free tier, less than a month after it started, yet This and Antenna remain. Weird!

*The lineup of the free tier: WPIX, This, Antenna, Bloomberg, Al Jazeera, Russia Today, CCTV News, BYU, NASA, Free Speech, C-SPAN, C-SPAN 2, Pentagon, HSN and QVC.

© Depositphotos / iofoto

After reading the arguments from a long list of trade unions, sports leagues, and the US Solicitor General against Aereo in its upcoming Supreme Court case, I’m encouraged to read an equally long list of trade groups and public interest organizations who are in favor of Aereo’s streaming TV technology.

The Electronic Freedom Foundation, along with Public Knowledge, the Consumer Electronics Association, and Engine Advocacy, filed an amicus brief that stresses Aereo’s private performances, building on rulings that allowed the growth of the VCR and other personal entertainment technology. They wrote, “The Aereo case pits entrenched businesses with deep political ties against an innovative entrepreneur who carefully followed the words of the law and implemented an idea of giving people the broadcast television service they are entitled to get.”

That followed a brief submitted by the American Cable Association, which pointed out that Aereo doesn’t own the TV distribution platform it uses. “Aereo functions more like a DVR retailer or antenna installer,” it said. “By facilitating reception of broadcast programming, it may reduce demand for a cable television service subscription, but it does not function like cable.”

And there was Dish Network, also in support of Aereo. Dish compared the service to its Slingbox and other internet-based devices. “None of these devices does anything without an end-user’s command,” it said. “They are like dumbwaiters, incapable of delivering a pail of water without the thirsty person tugging on ropes and pulleys. If an individual uses that dumbwaiter to fetch himself a video he recorded of Breaking Bad, the dumbwaiter manufacturer does not infringe a copyright in the show.”

All this rational praise for Aereo makes a great antidote for that earlier stuff. I couldn’t believe that Major League Baseball said Aereo’s service would knock its games off the air, since MLB is already actively removing  its over-the-air games. The Los Angeles Dodgers dropped all OTA broadcasts and moved to its own, expensive cable network, causing no end of hand-wringing in the second-largest US TV market. More quietly in Philadelphia, the Phillies moved all but a dozen of its OTA games to cable. Those defections leave the Cubs and White Sox as the only two teams with 30 or more OTA games in 2014, thanks mostly to WGN. Last year, I wrote that MLB was cutting off a future generation of fans, and you can add the recent-graduate cord-nevers to that neglected group. Sure MLB.TV does a great job of selling all out-of-market games online, but for most fans, those home-team games left the airwaves years ago.

For another refutation of goofy anti-Aereo arguments, check out Mike Masnick’s post yesterday on Techdirt. Once again, Masnick summarizes what’s been bouncing around in my head. “Multiple comments on various Aereo posts have people insisting that the convoluted setup of Aereo’s technology … shows that they’re trying to skirt around the law. However, it seems rather obvious that it’s the exact opposite. There is no logical reason to have this kind of setup except to be within the law. Aereo’s “insane” technological setup is much an indication of why it’s legal — and how screwed up copyright law is that this is the only legal way to build such a system.”

I don’t know if the Supreme Court has ruled against “entrenched businesses with deep political ties” lately. I’m hoping that this summer’s decision will be a welcome, rational exception.